New Jackson-Reed HS (Wilson HS) School Principal - Sah Brown from Eastern High School

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having lived in both places, yes, the families of school aged kids in ward 3 tend to be much wealthier than on the hill. That said, a much higher percentage of the kids also attend privates. And wilson has its fair share of kids who live out of bounds, although probably not as many as eastern, as a percentage of the population.

I agree that if the Higher SES hill population on the hill sent their kids to eastern at the same rate that the higher SES population in ward 3 send their kids to wilson, the demographics could be much more similar. I understand the hesitance of hill parents who aren’t receiving assurance that eastern would offer the same advanced coursework as wilson, even if kids capable of that work enroll at the school. I also understand the worry of ward 3 parents who hear that he did not try to attract hill parents to eastern, and think that he might also not seek to maintain the higher SES IB population at wilson. That said, ward 3 has status quo on its side.

I assume that the bolded is an effort to argue that the enrolled populations are not materially dissimilar when one considers OOB kid enrolled at Wilson and those who self-select out of Ward 3 to private schools. The data does not align with your hypothesis. 72+% of Eastern kids are "at-risk". That's 22% for Wilson.

But the larger point that you and others seem to be arguing is that the IB demographics of Eastern and Ward 3 are similar (if not identical). No matter how many times you repeat the claim and try to condescendingly dismiss away facts because, for instance, "you have lived in both places" the data is what it is. You all remind me of Trump supporters who say that they "know" the election was stolen and no data or facts anyone shows you will change your minds. But let's try an exercise in actual data, not your perceptions, shall we?

I am starting on the premise that what many of you are calling "the Hill" is the extended hill for purposes of this exercise. The Eastern HS IB population on CH can be approximated to zip codes 20002 and 20003. I am ignoring 20024 because it is very small and has even lower median income, etc. than 20002 and 20003. Trust me when I tell you including that does not help make your case. This is the actual data.

Population
Ward 3: 81,883
20002: 70,788
20003: 35,731

Median Income
Ward 3: $155,813
20002: $112,496
20003: $154,466

Families Below Poverty With Children
Ward 3: 0.7%
20002: 4.76%
20003: 4.27%

% with Bachelors Degree or Higher
Ward 3: 87%
20002: 64%
20003: 83%

Take a look at the % of families with kids below the poverty line. Those are the IB people sending kids to school. Even if we cherry pick just 20003, the data doesn't match Ward 3 and that's ignoring the fact that 20003 is much smaller than Ward 3 and that 20002 (IB for Eastern) is much larger and has even less favorable comparables to Ward 3.

I am not arguing that 20003 and 20002 UMC families don't have a right to send their kids to a school providing an excellent education. I am not arguing that sending your kids elsewhere is racist or that anyone should be condemned for doing so. My response here is a direct retort to those of you on this thread that think that just because everyone you know is UMC that must necessarily mean that the Hill's demographics are the same as your friends in Ward 3. They. Are. Not.

Good day, all.

You can’t compare 20002 and 20003 as an amorphous block when comparing Eastern to Wilson. Much of 20002 and 20003 are served by different much larger high schools. The Eastern catchment is small and much higher income.

It also includes 20024. You want to include 20024 too? OK.

Your belief that demographics of catchments for Eastern and Wilson are the same is not supported by data. I said it before I will say it again; you and your friends are in many ways no different than the Trump people who "know" the election was stolen and they are unwilling to listen to logic, reason or data that clearly disproves their belief.

Population
Ward 3: 81,883
20002: 70,788
20003: 35,731
20024: 13,138

Median Income
Ward 3: $155,813
20002: $112,496
20003: $154,466
20024: $103,925

Families Below Poverty With Children
Ward 3: 0.7%
20002: 4.76%
20003: 4.27%
20024: 4.88%

% with Bachelors Degree or Higher
Ward 3: 87%
20002: 64%
20003: 83%
20024: 82%

First, I think your stats actually show that the W3 and 20003 demographics are *incredibly* similar except that there are 4% additional families below the poverty line in 20003. Given that the median incomes are functionally identical, we don't really know what this means (are there 4% of W3ers who are like $5 above the poverty line or is the entire curve shaped differently or is just the very end of the curve differently shaped?)... but a school that is 5% below the poverty line is not going to have huge issues, so if the two schools were limited to THOSE populations, they would look the same with one extra guidance counselor at the 20002 school.

Second, 20002 extends way up into Trinidad and into lots of area that isn't zoned for Eastern (e.g., Wheatley education campus) and that whole chunk is much poorer. If you actually just took the part of 20002 that's IB for Eastern, it really would look different because of how poverty is concentrated. Not quite like 20003 and W3... though I actually think the % below the poverty line would be lower in the 20002 Eastern IB than in 20003 because of Potomac Gardens; the Eastern IB part of 20002 doesn't have that kind of concentrated poverty and the difference is only .5 to begin with.

But most importantly, the MEDIAN in all of these areas is over $100K! That means these IBs should be EASILY majority MC & UMC which is really what posters meant to begin with...

Another DCUM reply illustrating no understanding of DC or the meaning of data. I am guessing it would surprise you to learn that the median income for all of DC is over $100,000? By your logic that means all of DC is UMC, right?

Google tells me DC’s median household income is $92,000 (ie, <$100,000).

We’re long PPP’s statistics by Ward per individual or per household?

Well you Googled it so it must be right!

https://www.dchealthmatters.org/

Fantastic resource. You can see data cuts by Ward, zip, etc.

Your website tells me that Median Household Income for DC was $90,842.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:72% of eastern kids are at risk but only 37% of them actually live in boundary.

DP but now you want to carve out the Wilson IB kids that go private, and also carve out the at-risk Eastern kids that aren't IB? You have to realize every time you make a stretch like this you're proving PP's point, right? The enrolled populations are not similar.

Nobody said they enrolled populations are similar. The IB populations are similar! That’s the whole point! DCPS, and by extension Mr. Brown, didn’t/don’t care that so many people on the Hill find their IB HS so subpar as to not attend it.

This. I don’t give a hoot about Ward 3 having a marginally higher average income than Ward 6, the fact is that both school/IB populations are comprised of the very rich and the very poor. This principal has a demonstrated track record of not understand or not caring about one of those populations.

That's one way to put it. I mean, it is intellectually dishonest, but it is one way to put it. In framing it that way you ignore that the IB populations don't mirror the enrolled populations and he's catering to the kids actually enrolled.

Those kids are also enrolled in Wilson, friend. That’s the whole point of the concern.

Your reply makes no sense. The enrolled populations are not similar. I have already explained to you that 70%+ of Eastern are at-risk. 22% of Wilson are.

And those 22% are who this principal will care about. That’s. The. Whole. Point.

Why do you think this? Because he's black? At Eastern he focused on the majority enrolled population. He blew off people who weren't enrolled. That's. The. Whole. Point.

No, I think they because he showed zero interest in people’s real concerns about advanced offerings for high achieving students and because he’s tight with DCPS, whose #1 priority is closing the achievement gap, and has already been making changes to weaken Wilson’s academics.

"He's tight with DCPS"? HE WORKS FOR DCPS genius. Do you really think DCPS (or any employer) is going to hire a President of a division whose management vision and goals diverge from the C Suite?

Also, you said the quiet part out loud when you said "people's" real concerns. I guess the parents who don't share the same concerns aren't people?

If you believe that Wilson is lowering the bar and weakening standards (and there is certainly evidence to that effect) then perhaps you and your buddies ought to focus that ire on Central and the Mayor and not on the Principal. Although a tall, dark skinned black man sure does make an easy target as the face of the lowered standards, even if he wasn't there when they began.

There are principals who push the company line and there are principals who push the envelope. The company line at DCPS is close the achievement gap. It’s the reason nobody at DCPS or Eastern is sitting down and saying “gee, we are losing all of these high achieving in-boundary kids to charters… maybe we should do something about that.”

And it’s the reason parents at Wilson, where DCPS has already been tinkering in really unhelpful ways, should be worried about this hire.

[Anonymous]

I'm worried. Wilson is barely tolerable as it is, particularly in 9th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:72% of eastern kids are at risk but only 37% of them actually live in boundary.

DP but now you want to carve out the Wilson IB kids that go private, and also carve out the at-risk Eastern kids that aren't IB? You have to realize every time you make a stretch like this you're proving PP's point, right? The enrolled populations are not similar.

Nobody said they enrolled populations are similar. The IB populations are similar! That’s the whole point! DCPS, and by extension Mr. Brown, didn’t/don’t care that so many people on the Hill find their IB HS so subpar as to not attend it.

This. I don’t give a hoot about Ward 3 having a marginally higher average income than Ward 6, the fact is that both school/IB populations are comprised of the very rich and the very poor. This principal has a demonstrated track record of not understand or not caring about one of those populations.

That's one way to put it. I mean, it is intellectually dishonest, but it is one way to put it. In framing it that way you ignore that the IB populations don't mirror the enrolled populations and he's catering to the kids actually enrolled.

Those kids are also enrolled in Wilson, friend. That’s the whole point of the concern.

Your reply makes no sense. The enrolled populations are not similar. I have already explained to you that 70%+ of Eastern are at-risk. 22% of Wilson are.

And those 22% are who this principal will care about. That’s. The. Whole. Point.

Why do you think this? Because he's black? At Eastern he focused on the majority enrolled population. He blew off people who weren't enrolled. That's. The. Whole. Point.

No, I think they because he showed zero interest in people’s real concerns about advanced offerings for high achieving students and because he’s tight with DCPS, whose #1 priority is closing the achievement gap, and has already been making changes to weaken Wilson’s academics.

"He's tight with DCPS"? HE WORKS FOR DCPS genius. Do you really think DCPS (or any employer) is going to hire a President of a division whose management vision and goals diverge from the C Suite?

Also, you said the quiet part out loud when you said "people's" real concerns. I guess the parents who don't share the same concerns aren't people?

If you believe that Wilson is lowering the bar and weakening standards (and there is certainly evidence to that effect) then perhaps you and your buddies ought to focus that ire on Central and the Mayor and not on the Principal. Although a tall, dark skinned black man sure does make an easy target as the face of the lowered standards, even if he wasn't there when they began.

There are principals who push the company line and there are principals who push the envelope. The company line at DCPS is close the achievement gap. It’s the reason nobody at DCPS or Eastern is sitting down and saying “gee, we are losing all of these high achieving in-boundary kids to charters… maybe we should do something about that.”

And it’s the reason parents at Wilson, where DCPS has already been tinkering in really unhelpful ways, should be worried about this hire.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:72% of eastern kids are at risk but only 37% of them actually live in boundary.

DP but now you want to carve out the Wilson IB kids that go private, and also carve out the at-risk Eastern kids that aren't IB? You have to realize every time you make a stretch like this you're proving PP's point, right? The enrolled populations are not similar.

Nobody said they enrolled populations are similar. The IB populations are similar! That’s the whole point! DCPS, and by extension Mr. Brown, didn’t/don’t care that so many people on the Hill find their IB HS so subpar as to not attend it.

This. I don’t give a hoot about Ward 3 having a marginally higher average income than Ward 6, the fact is that both school/IB populations are comprised of the very rich and the very poor. This principal has a demonstrated track record of not understand or not caring about one of those populations.

That's one way to put it. I mean, it is intellectually dishonest, but it is one way to put it. In framing it that way you ignore that the IB populations don't mirror the enrolled populations and he's catering to the kids actually enrolled.

Those kids are also enrolled in Wilson, friend. That’s the whole point of the concern.

Your reply makes no sense. The enrolled populations are not similar. I have already explained to you that 70%+ of Eastern are at-risk. 22% of Wilson are.

And those 22% are who this principal will care about. That’s. The. Whole. Point.

Why do you think this? Because he's black? At Eastern he focused on the majority enrolled population. He blew off people who weren't enrolled. That's. The. Whole. Point.

No, I think they because he showed zero interest in people’s real concerns about advanced offerings for high achieving students and because he’s tight with DCPS, whose #1 priority is closing the achievement gap, and has already been making changes to weaken Wilson’s academics.

"He's tight with DCPS"? HE WORKS FOR DCPS genius. Do you really think DCPS (or any employer) is going to hire a President of a division whose management vision and goals diverge from the C Suite?

Also, you said the quiet part out loud when you said "people's" real concerns. I guess the parents who don't share the same concerns aren't people?

If you believe that Wilson is lowering the bar and weakening standards (and there is certainly evidence to that effect) then perhaps you and your buddies ought to focus that ire on Central and the Mayor and not on the Principal. Although a tall, dark skinned black man sure does make an easy target as the face of the lowered standards, even if he wasn't there when they began.

There are principals who push the company line and there are principals who push the envelope. The company line at DCPS is close the achievement gap. It’s the reason nobody at DCPS or Eastern is sitting down and saying “gee, we are losing all of these high achieving in-boundary kids to charters… maybe we should do something about that.”

And it’s the reason parents at Wilson, where DCPS has already been tinkering in really unhelpful ways, should be worried about this hire.

Look bottom line is DCPS closes the achievement gap but lowering the top instead of supporting and uplifting the bottom during the elementary years and beyond. By high school, it’s too late so you have to lower the top. It’s the same playbook time and time again. This is how they try to make the numbers look good. Just like their graduation rates with social promotion although kids graduating can barely read or do math.

The principal can make a difference at a school at the local level but this one likely won’t if he cow toes to central and DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:72% of eastern kids are at risk but only 37% of them actually live in boundary.

DP but now you want to carve out the Wilson IB kids that go private, and also carve out the at-risk Eastern kids that aren't IB? You have to realize every time you make a stretch like this you're proving PP's point, right? The enrolled populations are not similar.

Nobody said they enrolled populations are similar. The IB populations are similar! That’s the whole point! DCPS, and by extension Mr. Brown, didn’t/don’t care that so many people on the Hill find their IB HS so subpar as to not attend it.

This. I don’t give a hoot about Ward 3 having a marginally higher average income than Ward 6, the fact is that both school/IB populations are comprised of the very rich and the very poor. This principal has a demonstrated track record of not understand or not caring about one of those populations.

That's one way to put it. I mean, it is intellectually dishonest, but it is one way to put it. In framing it that way you ignore that the IB populations don't mirror the enrolled populations and he's catering to the kids actually enrolled.

Those kids are also enrolled in Wilson, friend. That’s the whole point of the concern.

Your reply makes no sense. The enrolled populations are not similar. I have already explained to you that 70%+ of Eastern are at-risk. 22% of Wilson are.

And those 22% are who this principal will care about. That’s. The. Whole. Point.

Why do you think this? Because he's black? At Eastern he focused on the majority enrolled population. He blew off people who weren't enrolled. That's. The. Whole. Point.

No, I think they because he showed zero interest in people’s real concerns about advanced offerings for high achieving students and because he’s tight with DCPS, whose #1 priority is closing the achievement gap, and has already been making changes to weaken Wilson’s academics.

"He's tight with DCPS"? HE WORKS FOR DCPS genius. Do you really think DCPS (or any employer) is going to hire a President of a division whose management vision and goals diverge from the C Suite?

Also, you said the quiet part out loud when you said "people's" real concerns. I guess the parents who don't share the same concerns aren't people?

If you believe that Wilson is lowering the bar and weakening standards (and there is certainly evidence to that effect) then perhaps you and your buddies ought to focus that ire on Central and the Mayor and not on the Principal. Although a tall, dark skinned black man sure does make an easy target as the face of the lowered standards, even if he wasn't there when they began.

There are principals who push the company line and there are principals who push the envelope. The company line at DCPS is close the achievement gap. It’s the reason nobody at DCPS or Eastern is sitting down and saying “gee, we are losing all of these high achieving in-boundary kids to charters… maybe we should do something about that.”

And it’s the reason parents at Wilson, where DCPS has already been tinkering in really unhelpful ways, should be worried about this hire.

Look bottom line is DCPS closes the achievement gap but lowering the top instead of supporting and uplifting the bottom during the elementary years and beyond. By high school, it’s too late so you have to lower the top. It’s the same playbook time and time again. This is how they try to make the numbers look good. Just like their graduation rates with social promotion although kids graduating can barely read or do math.

The principal can make a difference at a school at the local level but this one likely won’t if he cow toes to central and DCPS.

Typo tows not toes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having lived in both places, yes, the families of school aged kids in ward 3 tend to be much wealthier than on the hill. That said, a much higher percentage of the kids also attend privates. And wilson has its fair share of kids who live out of bounds, although probably not as many as eastern, as a percentage of the population.

I agree that if the Higher SES hill population on the hill sent their kids to eastern at the same rate that the higher SES population in ward 3 send their kids to wilson, the demographics could be much more similar. I understand the hesitance of hill parents who aren’t receiving assurance that eastern would offer the same advanced coursework as wilson, even if kids capable of that work enroll at the school. I also understand the worry of ward 3 parents who hear that he did not try to attract hill parents to eastern, and think that he might also not seek to maintain the higher SES IB population at wilson. That said, ward 3 has status quo on its side.

I assume that the bolded is an effort to argue that the enrolled populations are not materially dissimilar when one considers OOB kid enrolled at Wilson and those who self-select out of Ward 3 to private schools. The data does not align with your hypothesis. 72+% of Eastern kids are "at-risk". That's 22% for Wilson.

But the larger point that you and others seem to be arguing is that the IB demographics of Eastern and Ward 3 are similar (if not identical). No matter how many times you repeat the claim and try to condescendingly dismiss away facts because, for instance, "you have lived in both places" the data is what it is. You all remind me of Trump supporters who say that they "know" the election was stolen and no data or facts anyone shows you will change your minds. But let's try an exercise in actual data, not your perceptions, shall we?

I am starting on the premise that what many of you are calling "the Hill" is the extended hill for purposes of this exercise. The Eastern HS IB population on CH can be approximated to zip codes 20002 and 20003. I am ignoring 20024 because it is very small and has even lower median income, etc. than 20002 and 20003. Trust me when I tell you including that does not help make your case. This is the actual data.

Population
Ward 3: 81,883
20002: 70,788
20003: 35,731

Median Income
Ward 3: $155,813
20002: $112,496
20003: $154,466

Families Below Poverty With Children
Ward 3: 0.7%
20002: 4.76%
20003: 4.27%

% with Bachelors Degree or Higher
Ward 3: 87%
20002: 64%
20003: 83%

Take a look at the % of families with kids below the poverty line. Those are the IB people sending kids to school. Even if we cherry pick just 20003, the data doesn't match Ward 3 and that's ignoring the fact that 20003 is much smaller than Ward 3 and that 20002 (IB for Eastern) is much larger and has even less favorable comparables to Ward 3.

I am not arguing that 20003 and 20002 UMC families don't have a right to send their kids to a school providing an excellent education. I am not arguing that sending your kids elsewhere is racist or that anyone should be condemned for doing so. My response here is a direct retort to those of you on this thread that think that just because everyone you know is UMC that must necessarily mean that the Hill's demographics are the same as your friends in Ward 3. They. Are. Not.

Good day, all.

You can’t compare 20002 and 20003 as an amorphous block when comparing Eastern to Wilson. Much of 20002 and 20003 are served by different much larger high schools. The Eastern catchment is small and much higher income.

It also includes 20024. You want to include 20024 too? OK.

Your belief that demographics of catchments for Eastern and Wilson are the same is not supported by data. I said it before I will say it again; you and your friends are in many ways no different than the Trump people who "know" the election was stolen and they are unwilling to listen to logic, reason or data that clearly disproves their belief.

Population
Ward 3: 81,883
20002: 70,788
20003: 35,731
20024: 13,138

Median Income
Ward 3: $155,813
20002: $112,496
20003: $154,466
20024: $103,925

Families Below Poverty With Children
Ward 3: 0.7%
20002: 4.76%
20003: 4.27%
20024: 4.88%

% with Bachelors Degree or Higher
Ward 3: 87%
20002: 64%
20003: 83%
20024: 82%

First, I think your stats actually show that the W3 and 20003 demographics are *incredibly* similar except that there are 4% additional families below the poverty line in 20003. Given that the median incomes are functionally identical, we don't really know what this means (are there 4% of W3ers who are like $5 above the poverty line or is the entire curve shaped differently or is just the very end of the curve differently shaped?)... but a school that is 5% below the poverty line is not going to have huge issues, so if the two schools were limited to THOSE populations, they would look the same with one extra guidance counselor at the 20002 school.

Second, 20002 extends way up into Trinidad and into lots of area that isn't zoned for Eastern (e.g., Wheatley education campus) and that whole chunk is much poorer. If you actually just took the part of 20002 that's IB for Eastern, it really would look different because of how poverty is concentrated. Not quite like 20003 and W3... though I actually think the % below the poverty line would be lower in the 20002 Eastern IB than in 20003 because of Potomac Gardens; the Eastern IB part of 20002 doesn't have that kind of concentrated poverty and the difference is only .5 to begin with.

But most importantly, the MEDIAN in all of these areas is over $100K! That means these IBs should be EASILY majority MC & UMC which is really what posters meant to begin with...

Another DCUM reply illustrating no understanding of DC or the meaning of data. I am guessing it would surprise you to learn that the median income for all of DC is over $100,000? By your logic that means all of DC is UMC, right?

Google tells me DC’s median household income is $92,000 (ie, <$100,000).

We’re long PPP’s statistics by Ward per individual or per household?

Well you Googled it so it must be right!

https://www.dchealthmatters.org/

Fantastic resource. You can see data cuts by Ward, zip, etc.

Your website tells me that Median Household Income for DC was $90,842.

DCUM takes gaslighting to a whole other level. It's like if you just say it enough times with enough confidence it must be true.

https://www.dchealthmatters.org/?module=demographicdata&controller=index&action=index&id=130951§ionId=

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having lived in both places, yes, the families of school aged kids in ward 3 tend to be much wealthier than on the hill. That said, a much higher percentage of the kids also attend privates. And wilson has its fair share of kids who live out of bounds, although probably not as many as eastern, as a percentage of the population.

I agree that if the Higher SES hill population on the hill sent their kids to eastern at the same rate that the higher SES population in ward 3 send their kids to wilson, the demographics could be much more similar. I understand the hesitance of hill parents who aren’t receiving assurance that eastern would offer the same advanced coursework as wilson, even if kids capable of that work enroll at the school. I also understand the worry of ward 3 parents who hear that he did not try to attract hill parents to eastern, and think that he might also not seek to maintain the higher SES IB population at wilson. That said, ward 3 has status quo on its side.

I assume that the bolded is an effort to argue that the enrolled populations are not materially dissimilar when one considers OOB kid enrolled at Wilson and those who self-select out of Ward 3 to private schools. The data does not align with your hypothesis. 72+% of Eastern kids are "at-risk". That's 22% for Wilson.

But the larger point that you and others seem to be arguing is that the IB demographics of Eastern and Ward 3 are similar (if not identical). No matter how many times you repeat the claim and try to condescendingly dismiss away facts because, for instance, "you have lived in both places" the data is what it is. You all remind me of Trump supporters who say that they "know" the election was stolen and no data or facts anyone shows you will change your minds. But let's try an exercise in actual data, not your perceptions, shall we?

I am starting on the premise that what many of you are calling "the Hill" is the extended hill for purposes of this exercise. The Eastern HS IB population on CH can be approximated to zip codes 20002 and 20003. I am ignoring 20024 because it is very small and has even lower median income, etc. than 20002 and 20003. Trust me when I tell you including that does not help make your case. This is the actual data.

Population
Ward 3: 81,883
20002: 70,788
20003: 35,731

Median Income
Ward 3: $155,813
20002: $112,496
20003: $154,466

Families Below Poverty With Children
Ward 3: 0.7%
20002: 4.76%
20003: 4.27%

% with Bachelors Degree or Higher
Ward 3: 87%
20002: 64%
20003: 83%

Take a look at the % of families with kids below the poverty line. Those are the IB people sending kids to school. Even if we cherry pick just 20003, the data doesn't match Ward 3 and that's ignoring the fact that 20003 is much smaller than Ward 3 and that 20002 (IB for Eastern) is much larger and has even less favorable comparables to Ward 3.

I am not arguing that 20003 and 20002 UMC families don't have a right to send their kids to a school providing an excellent education. I am not arguing that sending your kids elsewhere is racist or that anyone should be condemned for doing so. My response here is a direct retort to those of you on this thread that think that just because everyone you know is UMC that must necessarily mean that the Hill's demographics are the same as your friends in Ward 3. They. Are. Not.

Good day, all.

You can’t compare 20002 and 20003 as an amorphous block when comparing Eastern to Wilson. Much of 20002 and 20003 are served by different much larger high schools. The Eastern catchment is small and much higher income.

It also includes 20024. You want to include 20024 too? OK.

Your belief that demographics of catchments for Eastern and Wilson are the same is not supported by data. I said it before I will say it again; you and your friends are in many ways no different than the Trump people who "know" the election was stolen and they are unwilling to listen to logic, reason or data that clearly disproves their belief.

Population
Ward 3: 81,883
20002: 70,788
20003: 35,731
20024: 13,138

Median Income
Ward 3: $155,813
20002: $112,496
20003: $154,466
20024: $103,925

Families Below Poverty With Children
Ward 3: 0.7%
20002: 4.76%
20003: 4.27%
20024: 4.88%

% with Bachelors Degree or Higher
Ward 3: 87%
20002: 64%
20003: 83%
20024: 82%

First, I think your stats actually show that the W3 and 20003 demographics are *incredibly* similar except that there are 4% additional families below the poverty line in 20003. Given that the median incomes are functionally identical, we don't really know what this means (are there 4% of W3ers who are like $5 above the poverty line or is the entire curve shaped differently or is just the very end of the curve differently shaped?)... but a school that is 5% below the poverty line is not going to have huge issues, so if the two schools were limited to THOSE populations, they would look the same with one extra guidance counselor at the 20002 school.

Second, 20002 extends way up into Trinidad and into lots of area that isn't zoned for Eastern (e.g., Wheatley education campus) and that whole chunk is much poorer. If you actually just took the part of 20002 that's IB for Eastern, it really would look different because of how poverty is concentrated. Not quite like 20003 and W3... though I actually think the % below the poverty line would be lower in the 20002 Eastern IB than in 20003 because of Potomac Gardens; the Eastern IB part of 20002 doesn't have that kind of concentrated poverty and the difference is only .5 to begin with.

But most importantly, the MEDIAN in all of these areas is over $100K! That means these IBs should be EASILY majority MC & UMC which is really what posters meant to begin with...

Another DCUM reply illustrating no understanding of DC or the meaning of data. I am guessing it would surprise you to learn that the median income for all of DC is over $100,000? By your logic that means all of DC is UMC, right?

Google tells me DC’s median household income is $92,000 (ie, <$100,000).

We’re long PPP’s statistics by Ward per individual or per household?

Well you Googled it so it must be right!

https://www.dchealthmatters.org/

Fantastic resource. You can see data cuts by Ward, zip, etc.

Your website tells me that Median Household Income for DC was $90,842.

DCUM takes gaslighting to a whole other level. It's like if you just say it enough times with enough confidence it must be true.

https://www.dchealthmatters.org/?module=demographicdata&controller=index&action=index&id=130951§ionId=

Your marquee site has different answers within it. I used some area on it yesterday to select the Median Income and the geography of “District of Columbia” to get $91K average over last 5 years, I think.

The dashboard page you just linked to says “2022 Demographics.” Obviously, this is not 2022 data, so I don’t know what it is.

If you go back to and Google like any other source — especially ones closer to primary than your aggregator — you’ll get $91,000 to $92,000.

It’s like if you keep looking at the same one page with anomalous dates, you’ll make it true…

[Anonymous]

I don't get it, Why are you people splitting hairs over median income data? You're losing the forest for the trees on this thread. This hire doesn't bode well for JR. It's depressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:72% of eastern kids are at risk but only 37% of them actually live in boundary.

DP but now you want to carve out the Wilson IB kids that go private, and also carve out the at-risk Eastern kids that aren't IB? You have to realize every time you make a stretch like this you're proving PP's point, right? The enrolled populations are not similar.

Nobody said they enrolled populations are similar. The IB populations are similar! That’s the whole point! DCPS, and by extension Mr. Brown, didn’t/don’t care that so many people on the Hill find their IB HS so subpar as to not attend it.

This. I don’t give a hoot about Ward 3 having a marginally higher average income than Ward 6, the fact is that both school/IB populations are comprised of the very rich and the very poor. This principal has a demonstrated track record of not understand or not caring about one of those populations.

That's one way to put it. I mean, it is intellectually dishonest, but it is one way to put it. In framing it that way you ignore that the IB populations don't mirror the enrolled populations and he's catering to the kids actually enrolled.

Those kids are also enrolled in Wilson, friend. That’s the whole point of the concern.

Your reply makes no sense. The enrolled populations are not similar. I have already explained to you that 70%+ of Eastern are at-risk. 22% of Wilson are.

And those 22% are who this principal will care about. That’s. The. Whole. Point.

Why do you think this? Because he's black? At Eastern he focused on the majority enrolled population. He blew off people who weren't enrolled. That's. The. Whole. Point.

No, I think they because he showed zero interest in people’s real concerns about advanced offerings for high achieving students and because he’s tight with DCPS, whose #1 priority is closing the achievement gap, and has already been making changes to weaken Wilson’s academics.

"He's tight with DCPS"? HE WORKS FOR DCPS genius. Do you really think DCPS (or any employer) is going to hire a President of a division whose management vision and goals diverge from the C Suite?

Also, you said the quiet part out loud when you said "people's" real concerns. I guess the parents who don't share the same concerns aren't people?

If you believe that Wilson is lowering the bar and weakening standards (and there is certainly evidence to that effect) then perhaps you and your buddies ought to focus that ire on Central and the Mayor and not on the Principal. Although a tall, dark skinned black man sure does make an easy target as the face of the lowered standards, even if he wasn't there when they began.

Shutting down the conversation with misplaced accusations of racism does nothing useful. I’m going to ignore you on that because it’s annoying and no one can actually get to any salient points with that type on nonsense.

Back on topic:

Will this principle only care about low performers and inflating grades through watering down the curriculum with progressive teaching philosophy?

Will the prospect of weakened academics, and specifically that perception from local wealthy or UMC parents, frighten away them away or push away to oss who would send their kids to the school? It’s pretty clear they actually drive this schools’ increase in testing scores and the better scores in general for dc public schools in the last few years.

Basically, you can decry gentrification or this and that. But really without these wealthy, caring parents who really stress education, the schools will just slide in the rankings. Progressive education policy weakens the curriculum. Ap for all? Altering grading patterns, less of an emphasis “on the correct answer” for math…it’s obvious. So is this school going to see a lot more of that from this principle?

Those are the bare truths. That’s it. If you can’t talk about that then I’m sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:72% of eastern kids are at risk but only 37% of them actually live in boundary.

DP but now you want to carve out the Wilson IB kids that go private, and also carve out the at-risk Eastern kids that aren't IB? You have to realize every time you make a stretch like this you're proving PP's point, right? The enrolled populations are not similar.

Nobody said they enrolled populations are similar. The IB populations are similar! That’s the whole point! DCPS, and by extension Mr. Brown, didn’t/don’t care that so many people on the Hill find their IB HS so subpar as to not attend it.

This. I don’t give a hoot about Ward 3 having a marginally higher average income than Ward 6, the fact is that both school/IB populations are comprised of the very rich and the very poor. This principal has a demonstrated track record of not understand or not caring about one of those populations.

That's one way to put it. I mean, it is intellectually dishonest, but it is one way to put it. In framing it that way you ignore that the IB populations don't mirror the enrolled populations and he's catering to the kids actually enrolled.

Those kids are also enrolled in Wilson, friend. That’s the whole point of the concern.

Your reply makes no sense. The enrolled populations are not similar. I have already explained to you that 70%+ of Eastern are at-risk. 22% of Wilson are.

And those 22% are who this principal will care about. That’s. The. Whole. Point.

Why do you think this? Because he's black? At Eastern he focused on the majority enrolled population. He blew off people who weren't enrolled. That's. The. Whole. Point.

No, I think they because he showed zero interest in people’s real concerns about advanced offerings for high achieving students and because he’s tight with DCPS, whose #1 priority is closing the achievement gap, and has already been making changes to weaken Wilson’s academics.

"He's tight with DCPS"? HE WORKS FOR DCPS genius. Do you really think DCPS (or any employer) is going to hire a President of a division whose management vision and goals diverge from the C Suite?

Also, you said the quiet part out loud when you said "people's" real concerns. I guess the parents who don't share the same concerns aren't people?

If you believe that Wilson is lowering the bar and weakening standards (and there is certainly evidence to that effect) then perhaps you and your buddies ought to focus that ire on Central and the Mayor and not on the Principal. Although a tall, dark skinned black man sure does make an easy target as the face of the lowered standards, even if he wasn't there when they began.

Shutting down the conversation with misplaced accusations of racism does nothing useful. I’m going to ignore you on that because it’s annoying and no one can actually get to any salient points with that type on nonsense.

Back on topic:

Will this principle only care about low performers and inflating grades through watering down the curriculum with progressive teaching philosophy?

Will the prospect of weakened academics, and specifically that perception from local wealthy or UMC parents, frighten away them away or push away to oss who would send their kids to the school? It’s pretty clear they actually drive this schools’ increase in testing scores and the better scores in general for dc public schools in the last few years.

Basically, you can decry gentrification or this and that. But really without these wealthy, caring parents who really stress education, the schools will just slide in the rankings. Progressive education policy weakens the curriculum. Ap for all? Altering grading patterns, less of an emphasis “on the correct answer” for math…it’s obvious. So is this school going to see a lot more of that from this principle?

Those are the bare truths. That’s it. If you can’t talk about that then I’m sorry.

You are hilarious! You accuse other people of shutting down discourse then state your opinions on complex topics on which academics and policymakers have been debating outcomes and causes for decades, then follow that up with a statement that these "[A]re the bare truths. That's it." I think you don't understand opinion vs fact. Or irony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:72% of eastern kids are at risk but only 37% of them actually live in boundary.

DP but now you want to carve out the Wilson IB kids that go private, and also carve out the at-risk Eastern kids that aren't IB? You have to realize every time you make a stretch like this you're proving PP's point, right? The enrolled populations are not similar.

Nobody said they enrolled populations are similar. The IB populations are similar! That’s the whole point! DCPS, and by extension Mr. Brown, didn’t/don’t care that so many people on the Hill find their IB HS so subpar as to not attend it.

This. I don’t give a hoot about Ward 3 having a marginally higher average income than Ward 6, the fact is that both school/IB populations are comprised of the very rich and the very poor. This principal has a demonstrated track record of not understand or not caring about one of those populations.

That's one way to put it. I mean, it is intellectually dishonest, but it is one way to put it. In framing it that way you ignore that the IB populations don't mirror the enrolled populations and he's catering to the kids actually enrolled.

Those kids are also enrolled in Wilson, friend. That’s the whole point of the concern.

Your reply makes no sense. The enrolled populations are not similar. I have already explained to you that 70%+ of Eastern are at-risk. 22% of Wilson are.

And those 22% are who this principal will care about. That’s. The. Whole. Point.

Why do you think this? Because he's black? At Eastern he focused on the majority enrolled population. He blew off people who weren't enrolled. That's. The. Whole. Point.

No, I think they because he showed zero interest in people’s real concerns about advanced offerings for high achieving students and because he’s tight with DCPS, whose #1 priority is closing the achievement gap, and has already been making changes to weaken Wilson’s academics.

"He's tight with DCPS"? HE WORKS FOR DCPS genius. Do you really think DCPS (or any employer) is going to hire a President of a division whose management vision and goals diverge from the C Suite?

Also, you said the quiet part out loud when you said "people's" real concerns. I guess the parents who don't share the same concerns aren't people?

If you believe that Wilson is lowering the bar and weakening standards (and there is certainly evidence to that effect) then perhaps you and your buddies ought to focus that ire on Central and the Mayor and not on the Principal. Although a tall, dark skinned black man sure does make an easy target as the face of the lowered standards, even if he wasn't there when they began.

Shutting down the conversation with misplaced accusations of racism does nothing useful. I’m going to ignore you on that because it’s annoying and no one can actually get to any salient points with that type on nonsense.

Back on topic:

Will this principle only care about low performers and inflating grades through watering down the curriculum with progressive teaching philosophy?

Will the prospect of weakened academics, and specifically that perception from local wealthy or UMC parents, frighten away them away or push away to oss who would send their kids to the school? It’s pretty clear they actually drive this schools’ increase in testing scores and the better scores in general for dc public schools in the last few years.

Basically, you can decry gentrification or this and that. But really without these wealthy, caring parents who really stress education, the schools will just slide in the rankings. Progressive education policy weakens the curriculum. Ap for all? Altering grading patterns, less of an emphasis “on the correct answer” for math…it’s obvious. So is this school going to see a lot more of that from this principle?

Those are the bare truths. That’s it. If you can’t talk about that then I’m sorry.

Ironically for a post that says “those are the truths,” this post provides no evidence of anything. This kind of post is really just a waste of everyone’s time.

If you want to make an argument, be coherent and submit evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it, Why are you people splitting hairs over median income data? You're losing the forest for the trees on this thread. This hire doesn't bode well for JR. It's depressing.

Nothing in this thread tells me that Principal Brown is a bad hire. Maybe he is a bad hire, but there's no evidence for that in this thread. The evidence cited is that he didn't provide certain data requested by skeptical parents of non-students who he could probably tell weren't serious about enrolling.

He's been a high school principal for many years, he knows the city, he clearly knows how to navigate DCPS bureaucracy. How many candidates are out there with that kind of experience? I think it sounds promising- and TBH, if he was white you all would be singing a different tune.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:72% of eastern kids are at risk but only 37% of them actually live in boundary.

DP but now you want to carve out the Wilson IB kids that go private, and also carve out the at-risk Eastern kids that aren't IB? You have to realize every time you make a stretch like this you're proving PP's point, right? The enrolled populations are not similar.

Nobody said they enrolled populations are similar. The IB populations are similar! That’s the whole point! DCPS, and by extension Mr. Brown, didn’t/don’t care that so many people on the Hill find their IB HS so subpar as to not attend it.

This. I don’t give a hoot about Ward 3 having a marginally higher average income than Ward 6, the fact is that both school/IB populations are comprised of the very rich and the very poor. This principal has a demonstrated track record of not understand or not caring about one of those populations.

That's one way to put it. I mean, it is intellectually dishonest, but it is one way to put it. In framing it that way you ignore that the IB populations don't mirror the enrolled populations and he's catering to the kids actually enrolled.

Those kids are also enrolled in Wilson, friend. That’s the whole point of the concern.

Your reply makes no sense. The enrolled populations are not similar. I have already explained to you that 70%+ of Eastern are at-risk. 22% of Wilson are.

And those 22% are who this principal will care about. That’s. The. Whole. Point.

Why do you think this? Because he's black? At Eastern he focused on the majority enrolled population. He blew off people who weren't enrolled. That's. The. Whole. Point.

No, I think they because he showed zero interest in people’s real concerns about advanced offerings for high achieving students and because he’s tight with DCPS, whose #1 priority is closing the achievement gap, and has already been making changes to weaken Wilson’s academics.

"He's tight with DCPS"? HE WORKS FOR DCPS genius. Do you really think DCPS (or any employer) is going to hire a President of a division whose management vision and goals diverge from the C Suite?

Also, you said the quiet part out loud when you said "people's" real concerns. I guess the parents who don't share the same concerns aren't people?

If you believe that Wilson is lowering the bar and weakening standards (and there is certainly evidence to that effect) then perhaps you and your buddies ought to focus that ire on Central and the Mayor and not on the Principal. Although a tall, dark skinned black man sure does make an easy target as the face of the lowered standards, even if he wasn't there when they began.

Shutting down the conversation with misplaced accusations of racism does nothing useful. I’m going to ignore you on that because it’s annoying and no one can actually get to any salient points with that type on nonsense.

Back on topic:

Will this principle only care about low performers and inflating grades through watering down the curriculum with progressive teaching philosophy?

Will the prospect of weakened academics, and specifically that perception from local wealthy or UMC parents, frighten away them away or push away to oss who would send their kids to the school? It’s pretty clear they actually drive this schools’ increase in testing scores and the better scores in general for dc public schools in the last few years.

Basically, you can decry gentrification or this and that. But really without these wealthy, caring parents who really stress education, the schools will just slide in the rankings. Progressive education policy weakens the curriculum. Ap for all? Altering grading patterns, less of an emphasis “on the correct answer” for math…it’s obvious. So is this school going to see a lot more of that from this principle?

Those are the bare truths. That’s it. If you can’t talk about that then I’m sorry.

Thank God you are not the new "principle"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it, Why are you people splitting hairs over median income data? You're losing the forest for the trees on this thread. This hire doesn't bode well for JR. It's depressing.

Nothing in this thread tells me that Principal Brown is a bad hire. Maybe he is a bad hire, but there's no evidence for that in this thread. The evidence cited is that he didn't provide certain data requested by skeptical parents of non-students who he could probably tell weren't serious about enrolling.

He's been a high school principal for many years, he knows the city, he clearly knows how to navigate DCPS bureaucracy. How many candidates are out there with that kind of experience? I think it sounds promising- and TBH, if he was white you all would be singing a different tune.

When you play the racist card, no one takes you seriously. It’s not because of his color, it’s because he is not interested in serving the needs of everyone in his community. Re-read the thread. A number of people have told you his actions and stance.

You can put your head in the sand if you want. Just circle back here in 1-2 years and then we can talk.