Why don't white students go to Banneker?

[Anonymous]

http://college.usatoday.com/2014/07/07/no-the-sat-is-not-required-more-colleges-join-test-optional-train/

At least 3-4 more colleges have announced same for 2015.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Banneker was founded with the fairly modest aim of being a "college prep" high school, a place where good kids that were decent students could learn in a less disruptive environment than the standard DCPS high schools of the time. It was never meant to be a local version of TJ or Stuyvesant. As it is, it took a tremendous amount of political battling and comprising to get it approved in the face of opponents who saw the program as "elitist", and anything more "elite" never would have gotten past the school board of the era.

It does a good job of being the "college prep" school that it was meant to be, but it just isn't that impressive compared to Wilson or the average suburban public high school.

+1. It is essentially a glorified KIPP high school. Better than Ballou no doubt, yet way behind competitive private, Walls and even Wilson. It all depends on the options each student has.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16:29 again. Someone commented earlier that high SES AAs may even be more likely to opt out of DCPS than high SES white families. If true, any idea why that might be?

Whoops, wrong thread--but I'm still curious!

because if you are a non white high academically succeeding child at Wilson you are in for a world of trouble

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wow.

+1. Assuming the crazy posters are affiliated with Banneker, what a disgrace, and what a surprise. No wonder why more whites (or Latinos or Asians) send their kids there. I'm leaving for more productive endeavors, bye.

Wow, you are an ignorant ass. You have no idea who these people are posting. In addition, how dare you pass judgement on anyone. The shit I've read on DCUMs lately makes me think that I live in the deep south - it's been soooo racist.

I hope I'm not the only one to appreciate the irony of this post: "How dare you pass judgment on anyone", while calling the PP an "ignorant ass" and many others "sooo racist". Don't you have any self-awareness?

Doesn't seem to be part of Banneker's curriculum. They are too busy getting sub-standard SAT scores, and trying to manage the boys.

Funny how you guys always show your true colors. I don't have a kid at Banneker, but I do respect the kids and parents that I've met. If you don't want your kid to go to a school with sub-standard SAT scores, don't send them. They don't need you or want you. They don't manage the boys. That's the point. You go off and enjoy your snowflake who is probably sub par in every important way. Only is your eyes are they perfect.

NP here. Why do you feel the need to insult some anonymous stranger's child? While we're talking about "showing true colors", I don't think this reflects well on you at all.

I don't know you. I don't really care how you think it reflects on me.

Different poster here: true, being anonymous, you don't care how it reflects on you. But you should care about how poorly the last few pages are reflecting on Banneker.

Wow. I'm not a Banneker parent, but it would reflect on Banneker. Oh, that makes sense. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banneker was founded with the fairly modest aim of being a "college prep" high school, a place where good kids that were decent students could learn in a less disruptive environment than the standard DCPS high schools of the time. It was never meant to be a local version of TJ or Stuyvesant. As it is, it took a tremendous amount of political battling and comprising to get it approved in the face of opponents who saw the program as "elitist", and anything more "elite" never would have gotten past the school board of the era.

It does a good job of being the "college prep" school that it was meant to be, but it just isn't that impressive compared to Wilson or the average suburban public high school.

+1. It is essentially a glorified KIPP high school. Better than Ballou no doubt, yet way behind competitive private, Walls and even Wilson. It all depends on the options each student has.

Based on what? SAT scores? Everything else Banneker is going better. It is not a glorified KIPP. Have you ever been to KIPP or Banneker that you can make that statement? KIPP has been struggling b/c their kids can't stay in college. It's a military style approach. Banneker students are very successful in college and it's just an academically rigorous school. Not KIPP.

[Anonymous]

I think the white PPs just honestly find it impossible to believe that an all-black high school could be intellectually rigorous and successful at preparing students for top colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the white PPs just honestly find it impossible to believe that an all-black high school could be intellectually rigorous and successful at preparing students for top colleges.

I think the black PPs just honestly find it impossible to believe that Banneker is neither as intellectually rigorous nor as successful at preparing students for top colleges as other available options, especially for whites, Asians, Latinos and high SES blacks.

So be it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:16:29 again. Someone commented earlier that high SES AAs may even be more likely to opt out of DCPS than high SES white families. If true, any idea why that might be?

Whoops, wrong thread--but I'm still curious!

because if you are a non white high academically succeeding child at Wilson you are in for a world of trouble

do you count good college admissions as trouble? DC and cohort haven't found any trouble at Wilson, FWIW

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Based on what? SAT scores? Everything else Banneker is going better. It is not a glorified KIPP. Have you ever been to KIPP or Banneker that you can make that statement? KIPP has been struggling b/c their kids can't stay in college. It's a military style approach. Banneker students are very successful in college and it's just an academically rigorous school. Not KIPP.

Really? They track the kids in college? How do you know this, and is their drop out rate due to academics or finances?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Based on what? SAT scores? Everything else Banneker is going better. It is not a glorified KIPP. Have you ever been to KIPP or Banneker that you can make that statement? KIPP has been struggling b/c their kids can't stay in college. It's a military style approach. Banneker students are very successful in college and it's just an academically rigorous school. Not KIPP.

Really? They track the kids in college? How do you know this, and is their drop out rate due to academics or finances?

KIPP does track the kids in college.
http://www.kipp.org/results/college-completion-report/2013-alumni-data-update

There really isn't any comparison between the two. Nationwide, according to the data KIPP releases, only 39% of their high school students even get a single 3 on an AP test. At Banneker, plenty of kids get 5's. 84% participate in AP and the % of scores 3 or higher is 89%, according to a recent Post article.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Based on what? SAT scores? Everything else Banneker is going better. It is not a glorified KIPP. Have you ever been to KIPP or Banneker that you can make that statement? KIPP has been struggling b/c their kids can't stay in college. It's a military style approach. Banneker students are very successful in college and it's just an academically rigorous school. Not KIPP.

Really? They track the kids in college? How do you know this, and is their drop out rate due to academics or finances?

Studies have shown that because KIPP learning is so structured, the kids struggle when there is not someone constantly looking over their shoulder telling them what to do. They are trying to address this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Based on what? SAT scores? Everything else Banneker is going better. It is not a glorified KIPP. Have you ever been to KIPP or Banneker that you can make that statement? KIPP has been struggling b/c their kids can't stay in college. It's a military style approach. Banneker students are very successful in college and it's just an academically rigorous school. Not KIPP.

Really? They track the kids in college? How do you know this, and is their drop out rate due to academics or finances?

KIPP does track the kids in college.
http://www.kipp.org/results/college-completion-report/2013-alumni-data-update

There really isn't any comparison between the two. Nationwide, according to the data KIPP releases, only 39% of their high school students even get a single 3 on an AP test. At Banneker, plenty of kids get 5's. 84% participate in AP and the % of scores 3 or higher is 89%, according to a recent Post article.

I think KIPP's stats look good, considering that most of their students are low income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Based on what? SAT scores? Everything else Banneker is going better. It is not a glorified KIPP. Have you ever been to KIPP or Banneker that you can make that statement? KIPP has been struggling b/c their kids can't stay in college. It's a military style approach. Banneker students are very successful in college and it's just an academically rigorous school. Not KIPP.

Really? They track the kids in college? How do you know this, and is their drop out rate due to academics or finances?

KIPP does track the kids in college.
http://www.kipp.org/results/college-completion-report/2013-alumni-data-update

There really isn't any comparison between the two. Nationwide, according to the data KIPP releases, only 39% of their high school students even get a single 3 on an AP test. At Banneker, plenty of kids get 5's. 84% participate in AP and the % of scores 3 or higher is 89%, according to a recent Post article.

I think KIPP's stats look good, considering that most of their students are low income.

Soft bigotry of low expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Based on what? SAT scores? Everything else Banneker is going better. It is not a glorified KIPP. Have you ever been to KIPP or Banneker that you can make that statement? KIPP has been struggling b/c their kids can't stay in college. It's a military style approach. Banneker students are very successful in college and it's just an academically rigorous school. Not KIPP.

Really? They track the kids in college? How do you know this, and is their drop out rate due to academics or finances?

KIPP does track the kids in college.
http://www.kipp.org/results/college-completion-report/2013-alumni-data-update

There really isn't any comparison between the two. Nationwide, according to the data KIPP releases, only 39% of their high school students even get a single 3 on an AP test. At Banneker, plenty of kids get 5's. 84% participate in AP and the % of scores 3 or higher is 89%, according to a recent Post article.

I think KIPP's stats look good, considering that most of their students are low income.

Soft bigotry of low expectations.

??

But isn't that exactly how PPs were justifying Banneker's so low SAT scores, for a selective school? According to you, one must have high expectations for low income students, but low expectations for the black race? What sense does that make?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the white PPs just honestly find it impossible to believe that an all-black high school could be intellectually rigorous and successful at preparing students for top colleges.

I think the black PPs just honestly find it impossible to believe that Banneker is neither as intellectually rigorous nor as successful at preparing students for top colleges as other available options, especially for whites, Asians, Latinos and high SES blacks.

So be it.

Oh come on. Banneker is clearly doing something very right, given its college placement and AP results. Maybe it is not the same as TJ but that is not the question. The question is why don't any white parents, at all, even consider this very good school as compared to other good DC options like Walls and Wilson?