WCP article on Watkins

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

That's a commonly held but flawed belief. Elementary school is only going to push students so far. Even in the where modest tracking occurs - informal and an exception - it's not going to meet every student's needs. The parents with the means and ability to lobby their interests also have the means and ability to supplement outside school.

Well that's just not true. I have a relative who teaches in Fairfax in the AAP program and the students in that program are doing some really amazing stuff starting in third grade.

AAP program is highly sought after but you're talking about a test-in program not without its flaws. AAP requires IQ testing in selection which is controversial and a somewhat dated. For a G&T program it also accepts a number far beyond the range of students who are actually G&T (15%) - that suggests they are skimming advanced students for the program in addition to actual G&T

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

and Fairfax, like Bethesda, has other structural advantages like less concentrated poverty. The high performing suburban schools outperform most school districts nationally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

Plenty of income inequality in the cluster boundary. And the gap between the groups is the highest in the city. It's shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

That's a commonly held but flawed belief. Elementary school is only going to push students so far. Even in the where modest tracking occurs - informal and an exception - it's not going to meet every student's needs. The parents with the means and ability to lobby their interests also have the means and ability to supplement outside school.

Well that's just not true. I have a relative who teaches in Fairfax in the AAP program and the students in that program are doing some really amazing stuff starting in third grade.

AAP program is highly sought after but you're talking about a test-in program not without its flaws. AAP requires IQ testing in selection which is controversial and a somewhat dated. For a G&T program it also accepts a number far beyond the range of students who are actually G&T (15%) - that suggests they are skimming advanced students for the program in addition to actual G&T

All of that may be true, but it doesn't change the fact that you can take a group of advanced kids and push them to achieve at an even higher level, which you were disputing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

Plenty of income inequality in the cluster boundary. And the gap between the groups is the highest in the city. It's shameful.

Yes how dare wealthy people buy a house in that neighborhood. So shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

Agreed. One challenge for Watkins and other comparable schools -- it has enough UMC footprint to avoid Title I status but not enough to cover the disparities which Title I might be able to address. The Cluster fund raises well but the socioeconomic gap is wide and it may not fully meet the school's real needs for addressing the achievement gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

Plenty of income inequality in the cluster boundary. And the gap between the groups is the highest in the city. It's shameful.

Yes how dare wealthy people buy a house in that neighborhood. So shameful.

Yes, the gap between the 1% and the 5% is a real concern.

[Anonymous]

This is the same lousy school that Snowden got away from to go to Logan, giving a call to Kaya. Ha! Norquist is correct. Capitol Hill deserves a neighborhood school. When the heck is that going to happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the same lousy school that Snowden got away from to go to Logan, giving a call to Kaya. Ha! Norquist is correct. Capitol Hill deserves a neighborhood school. When the heck is that going to happen?

Norquist sounds committed to and engaged in the school, however misguided on this topic. Your rant doesn't shed much light on the topic at hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the same lousy school that Snowden got away from to go to Logan, giving a call to Kaya. Ha! Norquist is correct. Capitol Hill deserves a neighborhood school. When the heck is that going to happen?

Norquist sounds committed to and engaged in the school, however misguided on this topic. Your rant doesn't shed much light on the topic at hand.

She's not misguided. Maybe fed up. PP, your rant sounds nonsensical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

Plenty of income inequality in the cluster boundary. And the gap between the groups is the highest in the city. It's shameful.

Yes how dare wealthy people buy a house in that neighborhood. So shameful.

It is shameful if you buy a house there and then try to stop over the kids in the local school and/or isolate your own kids from them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.