Stuart Hobson Middle School?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dozens of upper middle class families of all colors send their children to Stuart Hobson, and those children go on to myriad high schools and do very well in life. So yes, it's an option worth a closer look if you live on the Hill. But, the OOB availability will only get tougher as more neighborhood families (and those in feeder elementary schools - Watkins, LT, JO Wilson) choose the school. As an LT parent, I see more affluent kids in the upper grades, even transfers from other Hill schools, because parents want the option of Stuart Hobson. Of course they may end up elsewhere, but this is a good sign for SH in the coming 2-3 years.

Interesting. I know of a few families that live within 3 blocks of the school and chose to send dc across the city to another middle school rather than let dc walk 5 mins to SH.

Based on the recent numbers, I think the rising Hill MS families over the next 2 to 5 years are going to have much different choices than the current MS families. Latin is already really hard to get into and Basis is getting harder. Yes, some will move or go private but the next few years should be interesting.

I don't see much different choices in under a decade, not with the strongest Hill DCPS ES shut out of Hobson - Brent, Maury and SWS. It will be more like 10 years before either Ludlow or Watkins will be feeding mostly high SES kids to SH. Neither BASIS nor Latin has firm plans to open a second campus. The next few years will almost certainly be little different than the last few where MS goes. You'll see a slow, steady uptick in the number of white and high SES families at Hobson (breaking into the 20s, possibly low 30s) and that's about it.

Been on the Hill since the 90s, have ES age kids in a DCPS and can't share your optimism, not by a long shot.

this is the worst kind of biased attitudes towards schools -- you assume a school needs affluent white kids to succeed. Not everyone buys into your definition of success.

Do everyone a favor and go/stay in the charter/private/move camp. You won't be missed.

No, it's an attitude rooted in a large corpus of academic research on how to construct high-performing public middle and high schools. When most of the kids are high SES, all boats rise with the tide. When most kids are low SES and minority, you get a Banneker. That fabulous application DC public HS where average SAT scores barely clear the national average. I'm not white and certainly didn't grow up affluent (qualified for free lunch through middle school), but I was extremely fortunate to attend a middle school, and high school, where most classmates were high SES. I graduated from MIT.

^^ That makes you an education expert too or just a self-important asshole?

[Anonymous]

Don't take the bait, PP. Not difficult to see who the real asshole is here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I suspect 90% of the SH narrative is peddled by Brent families perpetually pissed about not getting a SH feed and hyping BASIS at every opportunity. GO JEFFERSON!

Ha, ha. Rings true. You made my day!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect 90% of the SH narrative is peddled by Brent families perpetually pissed about not getting a SH feed and hyping BASIS at every opportunity. GO JEFFERSON!

Ha, ha. Rings true. You made my day!

I love Brent families. Without them where would we get to hear people bash SH at the same time they suggest that they got screwed by not being able to attend. I'm convinced the narrative that pushes back on SH's rapid improvement is driven by Brent (and Maury) families that would rather no one have nice things if they can't have them.

[Anonymous]

Now, to be realistic, one some metrics and parent experience Jefferson (and to a lesser degree Eliot-Hine) does objectively better than Stuart-Hobson. So let's not over-blame Brent (and Maury) families for what are hard facts. For better and for worse, those objective differences lie in the school culture and in the school's ability to advance students against the odds.
On discipline: SH has undeniably more of a laissez-faire approach to behavior and school culture. The result is a little more elbowing and hallway kerfuffles. This is grounded in the notion that middle schoolers must find their way without constantly being forced to walk quietly in lines. There is merit in that. By comparison, the other Ward 6 schools are more "orderly" and "strict" in their approach to teaching, no less love imho, and no less regard for the whole child, but a different approach. There, too, is merit in that.
On achievement: Factoring in demographic characteristics of students, Jefferson has made more gains than SH. I can't find the relevant study but vaguely remember that EH was shown as somewhat trailing on those metrics; I don't remember whether Basis was included. (If someone remembers the link, please post.) Crux of course is that what makes Jefferson great also makes it unacceptable to those who don't readily see how those metrics can benefit a child without any of those challenging demographics. Never mind that I can.

[Anonymous]

Parent of former Brent students here who would in no way consider sending my child to SH. Life is too short for mediocrity or worse (Jefferson). And, no, middle schoolers don’t need three hours of homework, no outdoor time and nonstop drama (BASIS). If it works for you, great.

[Anonymous]

+100. Couldn't agree more, PP. Thanks for this accurate post.

SH students in bright red polo shirts have been rampaging through our alley in NE in packs after school for years. On a good day, they just scream obscenities, drop cigarette butts and leave trash. On a bad day, they get into group fist fights.

We've gone to the school to complain and called the cops more times than I can count. But they always return soon enough.

Signed
OOB Brent Parent Looking at Privates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now, to be realistic, one some metrics and parent experience Jefferson (and to a lesser degree Eliot-Hine) does objectively better than Stuart-Hobson. So let's not over-blame Brent (and Maury) families for what are hard facts. For better and for worse, those objective differences lie in the school culture and in the school's ability to advance students against the odds.
On discipline: SH has undeniably more of a laissez-faire approach to behavior and school culture. The result is a little more elbowing and hallway kerfuffles. This is grounded in the notion that middle schoolers must find their way without constantly being forced to walk quietly in lines. There is merit in that. By comparison, the other Ward 6 schools are more "orderly" and "strict" in their approach to teaching, no less love imho, and no less regard for the whole child, but a different approach. There, too, is merit in that.
On achievement: Factoring in demographic characteristics of students, Jefferson has made more gains than SH. I can't find the relevant study but vaguely remember that EH was shown as somewhat trailing on those metrics; I don't remember whether Basis was included. (If someone remembers the link, please post.) Crux of course is that what makes Jefferson great also makes it unacceptable to those who don't readily see how those metrics can benefit a child without any of those challenging demographics. Never mind that I can.

To paraphrase one of my favorite movies, I do not think "objectively" and "hard facts" mean what you think they mean. Parent experience is a subjective, not objective measure. Did someone teach you that if you just assert that something is "objectively better", "undeniably" and "hard facts" somehow makes it so? Brent families truly are preious; objectively and undeniably precious. And that is just a hard fact.

[Anonymous]

My favorite germane hard fact is that the OOB population at SH has been more than two-thirds of the student body since the 1980s.

Sorry, but neighbors can't be ordered to have sufficient confidence in the school to enroll their children; they need to be incentivized.

SH might want to start by getting a handle on the rowdiness that turns neighbors off before they so much as enter the building!

[Anonymous]

Good point about what is "fact" and not and how they are perceived. The whole OOB % fact thing is one of those fallacies. While the number may be "hard", it may not mean what you think it means. What if I tell you I'm an OOB SH parent living at C St and 14th NE? Does your demeanor towards that fact change if I say I live at D St and Ridge Rd SE?
Regardless, since you don't actually know where I live, and much less where all of the other whatever % OOB SH parents live, what does that number really tell you?
There are data that actually tell you where people come from attending schools, interesting ones, but the OOB % data point really says just about nothing at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dozens of upper middle class families of all colors send their children to Stuart Hobson, and those children go on to myriad high schools and do very well in life. So yes, it's an option worth a closer look if you live on the Hill. But, the OOB availability will only get tougher as more neighborhood families (and those in feeder elementary schools - Watkins, LT, JO Wilson) choose the school. As an LT parent, I see more affluent kids in the upper grades, even transfers from other Hill schools, because parents want the option of Stuart Hobson. Of course they may end up elsewhere, but this is a good sign for SH in the coming 2-3 years.

Interesting. I know of a few families that live within 3 blocks of the school and chose to send dc across the city to another middle school rather than let dc walk 5 mins to SH.

Based on the recent numbers, I think the rising Hill MS families over the next 2 to 5 years are going to have much different choices than the current MS families. Latin is already really hard to get into and Basis is getting harder. Yes, some will move or go private but the next few years should be interesting.

I don't see much different choices in under a decade, not with the strongest Hill DCPS ES shut out of Hobson - Brent, Maury and SWS. It will be more like 10 years before either Ludlow or Watkins will be feeding mostly high SES kids to SH. Neither BASIS nor Latin has firm plans to open a second campus. The next few years will almost certainly be little different than the last few where MS goes. You'll see a slow, steady uptick in the number of white and high SES families at Hobson (breaking into the 20s, possibly low 30s) and that's about it.

Been on the Hill since the 90s, have ES age kids in a DCPS and can't share your optimism, not by a long shot.

this is the worst kind of biased attitudes towards schools -- you assume a school needs affluent white kids to succeed. Not everyone buys into your definition of success.

Do everyone a favor and go/stay in the charter/private/move camp. You won't be missed.

race has nothing to do with it but yes, the most successful schools both bahaviorally and academically have higher income families. Its likes this across the nation. Exceptions would be kill and drill schools like KIPP but you couldnt pay me to put my kid in boot camp. You have your head in the sand if you don't think this matters. A report was just released about the brain differences of neglected kids. You can't just make up for that in the class.

Can you even see the contradiction there? Schools like KIPP show that you CAN close the achievement gap. Whose head is in the sand, exactly? Also, FYI, not all lower income black kids are neglected; and not all black kids in DC are lower income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dozens of upper middle class families of all colors send their children to Stuart Hobson, and those children go on to myriad high schools and do very well in life. So yes, it's an option worth a closer look if you live on the Hill. But, the OOB availability will only get tougher as more neighborhood families (and those in feeder elementary schools - Watkins, LT, JO Wilson) choose the school. As an LT parent, I see more affluent kids in the upper grades, even transfers from other Hill schools, because parents want the option of Stuart Hobson. Of course they may end up elsewhere, but this is a good sign for SH in the coming 2-3 years.

Interesting. I know of a few families that live within 3 blocks of the school and chose to send dc across the city to another middle school rather than let dc walk 5 mins to SH.

Based on the recent numbers, I think the rising Hill MS families over the next 2 to 5 years are going to have much different choices than the current MS families. Latin is already really hard to get into and Basis is getting harder. Yes, some will move or go private but the next few years should be interesting.

I don't see much different choices in under a decade, not with the strongest Hill DCPS ES shut out of Hobson - Brent, Maury and SWS. It will be more like 10 years before either Ludlow or Watkins will be feeding mostly high SES kids to SH. Neither BASIS nor Latin has firm plans to open a second campus. The next few years will almost certainly be little different than the last few where MS goes. You'll see a slow, steady uptick in the number of white and high SES families at Hobson (breaking into the 20s, possibly low 30s) and that's about it.

Been on the Hill since the 90s, have ES age kids in a DCPS and can't share your optimism, not by a long shot.

this is the worst kind of biased attitudes towards schools -- you assume a school needs affluent white kids to succeed. Not everyone buys into your definition of success.

Do everyone a favor and go/stay in the charter/private/move camp. You won't be missed.

race has nothing to do with it but yes, the most successful schools both bahaviorally and academically have higher income families. Its likes this across the nation. Exceptions would be kill and drill schools like KIPP but you couldnt pay me to put my kid in boot camp. You have your head in the sand if you don't think this matters. A report was just released about the brain differences of neglected kids. You can't just make up for that in the class.

Can you even see the contradiction there? Schools like KIPP show that you CAN close the achievement gap. Whose head is in the sand, exactly? Also, FYI, not all lower income black kids are neglected; and not all black kids in DC are lower income.

Closing the gap by teaching to the test?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dozens of upper middle class families of all colors send their children to Stuart Hobson, and those children go on to myriad high schools and do very well in life. So yes, it's an option worth a closer look if you live on the Hill. But, the OOB availability will only get tougher as more neighborhood families (and those in feeder elementary schools - Watkins, LT, JO Wilson) choose the school. As an LT parent, I see more affluent kids in the upper grades, even transfers from other Hill schools, because parents want the option of Stuart Hobson. Of course they may end up elsewhere, but this is a good sign for SH in the coming 2-3 years.

Interesting. I know of a few families that live within 3 blocks of the school and chose to send dc across the city to another middle school rather than let dc walk 5 mins to SH.

Based on the recent numbers, I think the rising Hill MS families over the next 2 to 5 years are going to have much different choices than the current MS families. Latin is already really hard to get into and Basis is getting harder. Yes, some will move or go private but the next few years should be interesting.

I don't see much different choices in under a decade, not with the strongest Hill DCPS ES shut out of Hobson - Brent, Maury and SWS. It will be more like 10 years before either Ludlow or Watkins will be feeding mostly high SES kids to SH. Neither BASIS nor Latin has firm plans to open a second campus. The next few years will almost certainly be little different than the last few where MS goes. You'll see a slow, steady uptick in the number of white and high SES families at Hobson (breaking into the 20s, possibly low 30s) and that's about it.

Been on the Hill since the 90s, have ES age kids in a DCPS and can't share your optimism, not by a long shot.

this is the worst kind of biased attitudes towards schools -- you assume a school needs affluent white kids to succeed. Not everyone buys into your definition of success.

Do everyone a favor and go/stay in the charter/private/move camp. You won't be missed.

race has nothing to do with it but yes, the most successful schools both bahaviorally and academically have higher income families. Its likes this across the nation. Exceptions would be kill and drill schools like KIPP but you couldnt pay me to put my kid in boot camp. You have your head in the sand if you don't think this matters. A report was just released about the brain differences of neglected kids. You can't just make up for that in the class.

Can you even see the contradiction there? Schools like KIPP show that you CAN close the achievement gap. Whose head is in the sand, exactly? Also, FYI, not all lower income black kids are neglected; and not all black kids in DC are lower income.

Closing the gap by teaching to the test?

Yes -- the test reflects an actual curriculum and learning. I understand why people would have issues with KIPP, but it's way too dismissive to say "oh, they're just teaching to the test."

[Anonymous]

So true! Also don't let schools get away with dismissing low scores and high gaps with an arrogant "we're not teaching to the test, you know".

Tests and their tracking over time have come a long way, and so have attitudes about them. School leaders and teachers mostly understand that the kind of "teaching to the test" and "drill and kill approach" don't actually produce durable gains.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:+100. Couldn't agree more, PP. Thanks for this accurate post.

SH students in bright red polo shirts have been rampaging through our alley in NE in packs after school for years. On a good day, they just scream obscenities, drop cigarette butts and leave trash. On a bad day, they get into group fist fights.

We've gone to the school to complain and called the cops more times than I can count. But they always return soon enough.

Signed
OOB Brent Parent Looking at Privates

I live near SH and have had similar experiences with SH students. I think the uniforms were a bad/good move because I now know for certain which students were calling my children racist names at the playground and blatantly littering while walking down the street. Did not send any of my children to the Cluster past Watkins. This has been a problem for years with that school, even though the neighborhood has gotten calmer.