SWS moving to Prospect LC building?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sws has become what is known as a magnet school ( no neighborhood boundary, drawing from district as a whole based on special interest/curriculum). Logan Montessori is also a magnet school. We also have high schools ( some with nominal applications ) that act as magnet schools. I.e. nobody has geographic right of entry. What I find baffling is that after multiple proposals and efforts, DCPS has refused to implement a magnet school at the middle school level. This is arguably when it could most impact and keep families invested in the system.

So DCPS embraces magnets for ages 3 to 10 and 14 to 18 but rejects them for ages 11-13. What could be the reasoning here?

But SWS does seem to have boundaries, so how is it a magnet school? If it is for the littlest kids, how can it really be a magnet since there is no way to distinguish a gifted kid/kid with special talents this young. It seems that it either has to be a neighborhood school or it has to be a pure lottery school (and then why isn't it a charter?)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sws has become what is known as a magnet school ( no neighborhood boundary, drawing from district as a whole based on special interest/curriculum). Logan Montessori is also a magnet school. We also have high schools ( some with nominal applications ) that act as magnet schools. I.e. nobody has geographic right of entry. What I find baffling is that after multiple proposals and efforts, DCPS has refused to implement a magnet school at the middle school level. This is arguably when it could most impact and keep families invested in the system.

So DCPS embraces magnets for ages 3 to 10 and 14 to 18 but rejects them for ages 11-13. What could be the reasoning here?

Easy one. Politicians terrified that the students in any test-in ms program would be overwhelmingly white and Asian if the admissions test/process were remotely fair, causing the floodgates of blacklash to open and before election days. By the time HS rolls around, they're aren't nearly enough white students left in dcps for a test-in program to be overwhelmingly white, or for anybody much to complain about affirmative action admissions (keeping many highly qualified white kids out SWW in favor of admitting less qualified AA students). MS magnets/test in programs are a prospect that puts the fear of god in pols who reject gifted and talented/accelerated ES programs for the most able kids of all races. Without such ES programs, test-in MS programs will not become politically viable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
But SWS does seem to have boundaries, so how is it a magnet school? If it is for the littlest kids, how can it really be a magnet since there is no way to distinguish a gifted kid/kid with special talents this young. It seems that it either has to be a neighborhood school or it has to be a pure lottery school (and then why isn't it a charter?)

Why not when NYC tests 4 and 5 year olds seeking to enter gifted kindergarten programs system wide? Closer to home, some suburban school districts in this metro area start gifted programs in 1st or 2nd grade (2nd seems to be the standard). In theory, SWS or any other DCPS school could have a general lottery track for pres-k or 1st, then a regular track and a test-in gifted track for grades 2+. Thousands of public elementary schools around the country have two tracks from 2nd grade - my nieces attend one in FL.

[Anonymous]

Magnet schools, by definition, pull from the distict as a whole across normal school boundaries. No need to have competitive/ application admissions. Just families who opt in for a specialized program. This is what Logan Montessori and now SWS are. Magnet schools. I would love to see the same thing at middle school level. Read definiion of magnet school here:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet_school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sws has become what is known as a magnet school ( no neighborhood boundary, drawing from district as a whole based on special interest/curriculum). Logan Montessori is also a magnet school. We also have high schools ( some with nominal applications ) that act as magnet schools. I.e. nobody has geographic right of entry. What I find baffling is that after multiple proposals and efforts, DCPS has refused to implement a magnet school at the middle school level. This is arguably when it could most impact and keep families invested in the system.

So DCPS embraces magnets for ages 3 to 10 and 14 to 18 but rejects them for ages 11-13. What could be the reasoning here?

Easy one. Politicians terrified that the students in any test-in ms program would be overwhelmingly white and Asian if the admissions test/process were remotely fair, causing the floodgates of blacklash to open and before election days. By the time HS rolls around, they're aren't nearly enough white students left in dcps for a test-in program to be overwhelmingly white, or for anybody much to complain about affirmative action admissions (keeping many highly qualified white kids out SWW in favor of admitting less qualified AA students). MS magnets/test in programs are a prospect that puts the fear of god in pols who reject gifted and talented/accelerated ES programs for the most able kids of all races. Without such ES programs, test-in MS programs will not become politically viable.

What about Banneker? A magnet high school that white families ignore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Magnet schools, by definition, pull from the distict as a whole across normal school boundaries. No need to have competitive/ application admissions. Just families who opt in for a specialized program. This is what Logan Montessori and now SWS are. Magnet schools. I would love to see the same thing at middle school level. Read definiion of magnet school here:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet_school

What would be the point of another mediocre lottery admissions middle school? You can head to Washington Latin for that. and soon to DCI. A test-in middle school for advanced kids would add something to the menu of public school offerings. Unlike a 'specialized program" admitting random kids, many of whom would be poorly prepared, in need of remediation and IN CLASS with those who are ahead of the curve, a true magnet would serve the needs of the city's growing upper-middle-class population and the most able poor kids. With more decent elementary schools like the reinvented SWS coming along all the time, demand for a test-in DCPS middle schoolp program will steadily increase.

[Anonymous]

"Test-in" does not mean "true magnet". You muddy the discussion when you don't use terms correctly. "Test-in" is one kind of magnet school. "City-wide lottery" is another kind of magnet school.

Anyway, if politicians can't stomach a test in middle school magnet, they could replicate what some of the charters do to have an academically ambitious group of self selected students: teach Latin, lots of homework,, frequent exams and projects, high level courses. And the DCPS magnet school could reserve the right to return kids to their inboundary school if certain academic standards are not met.

Yes, agreed, this is not as efficient as a test in middle school, but may be more politically palatable?

[Anonymous]

True magnet programs are intended to benefit the receiving population more than the sending population, which is why they're typically put into place within a neighborhood school. In other words, while the magnet program is district wide, it's within a boundary based school. The goal is diversity - use a magnet program to attract diverse students to an otherwise homogeneous school. So an entire school that's lottery based isn't really a magnet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The word is citywide lottery for 13-14, with boundaries or proximity preference to be revisited in the spring. I like the idea of a citywide lottery because it may help to keep some families in DCPS who might otherwise leave for charters.

Do you mean the proximity preference idea would be revisited in Spring 2014 (not 2013)? DCPS must have its policy in place before the 13-14 lottery gets underway because they can't play bait and switch with families who don't have proximity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Organize and lobby dcps! Did you see how many communiies thought their schools were going to close and then they presented well thought out plans and voila, school saved? Go for it.

No point in lobbying since its a majority of SWS PARENTS wanting a city-wide draw. If you attended last week's parents planning meeting, you're aware that this is the case.

I did attend that meeting, and there was NO clear consensus on parent preference for a city wide option, only interest in a permanent landing spot at the then prospective, now officially closing Prospect Learning Center. The principal clearly stated that the details still need to be worked out, and a lot of it lies in DCPS hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I did attend that meeting, and there was NO clear consensus on parent preference for a city wide option, only interest in a permanent landing spot at the then prospective, now officially closing Prospect Learning Center. The principal clearly stated that the details still need to be worked out, and a lot of it lies in DCPS hands.

I also attended. While there wasn't a clear concensus and parent priority was obviously to pin down the Prospect Learning Center location, parent preference clearly leaned toward a city-wide option. What the Stanton Park neighborhood parents might need to get to grips with is that since, historically, SWS has not primarily served their neighborhood it is unlikely to swing that way. There are more Lincoln Park area parents than others, a group focused on ending the less-than-appealing Watkins feed. Watkins has always lost most of its upper-middle-class parents between 1st and 5th and SWS, which a much lower percentage of FARMS kids and better leadership and teaching, is poised to avoid. The troubles of the LT IB population are not high on the list of parent concerns. SWS parents know that working with DCPS to carve out new ES boundaries on the Hill would be so complicated, time-consuming and politically messy that the city-wide feed is probably the only way to go, accusations that SWS has become a de facto charter in its PreS-5 incarnation notwithstanding.

[Anonymous]

Just let me point out: the assumption that a city-wide lottery makes SWS like a charter is not accurate.

What really makes a charter school like a charter school is its charter. This gives the charter school a remarkable degree of independence in curriculum, hiring/firing, budgeting and overall management. It makes a charter school flexible and able to adapt to changing conditions.

In DC, charter schools have a city-wide lottery. But that certainly isn't true in other places around the country.

So no. SWS is far from a "defacto" charter school. But is no longer a neighborhood DCPS school. It resembles Montessori, Banneker, Ellington and SWW in this way. So unless you consider those schools " de facto" charter schools, you can't consider SWS one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just let me point out: the assumption that a city-wide lottery makes SWS like a charter is not accurate.

What really makes a charter school like a charter school is its charter. This gives the charter school a remarkable degree of independence in curriculum, hiring/firing, budgeting and overall management. It makes a charter school flexible and able to adapt to changing conditions.

In DC, charter schools have a city-wide lottery. But that certainly isn't true in other places around the country.

So no. SWS is far from a "defacto" charter school. But is no longer a neighborhood DCPS school. It resembles Montessori, Banneker, Ellington and SWW in this way. So unless you consider those schools " de facto" charter schools, you can't consider SWS one.

Agree to to a point, but I see no enrollment difference between a dcps citywide option and a dc public charter, aside from the need to prioritize dcps lottery choices and no need to prioritize charters.

[Anonymous]

Received this from DCPS in response to my email (in part):

After careful consideration, the decision has been made that School-within-a-School (SWS) will be a "citywide school", meaning will not have a neighborhood boundary. For purposes of this year's lottery, the only preference category will be sibling preference, or only families with students currently enrolled will receive a preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I did attend that meeting, and there was NO clear consensus on parent preference for a city wide option, only interest in a permanent landing spot at the then prospective, now officially closing Prospect Learning Center. The principal clearly stated that the details still need to be worked out, and a lot of it lies in DCPS hands.

I also attended. While there wasn't a clear concensus and parent priority was obviously to pin down the Prospect Learning Center location, parent preference clearly leaned toward a city-wide option. What the Stanton Park neighborhood parents might need to get to grips with is that since, historically, SWS has not primarily served their neighborhood it is unlikely to swing that way. There are more Lincoln Park area parents than others, a group focused on ending the less-than-appealing Watkins feed. Watkins has always lost most of its upper-middle-class parents between 1st and 5th and SWS, which a much lower percentage of FARMS kids and better leadership and teaching, is poised to avoid. The troubles of the LT IB population are not high on the list of parent concerns. SWS parents know that working with DCPS to carve out new ES boundaries on the Hill would be so complicated, time-consuming and politically messy that the city-wide feed is probably the only way to go, accusations that SWS has become a de facto charter in its PreS-5 incarnation notwithstanding.

City side preference based on what? The dcps rep couldn't even manage a simple hands up vote on that specific question because there were too many variables to qualify. It's irrelevant because dcps was just putting on a show -- they had no intention of maintaining neighborhood preference for SWS, at least not without the broader context of revisiting Ward 6 boundaries, which is planned for the spring . That was crystal clear.

I agree with the quality of teachers and staff, but what makes you think SWS will not attract the same OOB populations which graviate to Ludlow Taylor and Watkins?