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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That principal?!

We live on Capitol Hill. My spouse and I met with Brown when when we were looking into the IB Diploma program at Eastern for our oldest in early 2020, before the pandemic began.

Brown seemed clueless about what it would take to attract high SES in-boundary families like ours to Eastern, without any real interest in doing so. He claimed that the program offered "real rigor and challenge to all" repeatedly, and wouldn't answer our questions about Eastern's average IBD points totals. He also wouldn't talk about how many of the "full Diploma" students at Eastern actually earn the Diploma.

Later on, we learned that Eastern's average points total has been mired in the mid 20s, on a 24-45 points pass scale, since the program's inception a decade ago. We also learned that most of the Eastern students who try to earn the Diploma have failed since the get go. We left the meeting unimpressed with Brown and Eastern's IBD program and didn't enroll our child.

So, let me get this right. You walked into this man’s office with your white hood on, took it off, handed it to him and asked him to put it on. He rebuffed your offer and you decided you didn’t like him. Eastern HS kids test poorly due to various reasons (poverty, trauma, inequality, etc). He does not have to explain any of that to you. Your child could have obtained a good education there, but your classism and racism prevented you from entertaining the thought of your child in that school.

ha ha, normally I dislike this kind of invective, but seems to hit the mark.

PP who talked to Brown. My spouse and I are people of color who come from working-class backgrounds. We attended college on full Pell Grants.

We wouldn't have bothered going to Eastern to speak to Brown if we hadn't been trying to keep an open mind. What are you posters slamming us celebrating? Brown's able leadership at Eastern?

I agree with you. I work for a neighborhood organization and Principal Sah asked for a meeting with us. He said he was interested in attracting more in-boundariy students but he was clueless how to do it. He shot down any ideas that were brought up and acted like in-boundary students should attend just because. It was a weird meeting

So basically it’s the same prisoners dilemma that none of us know how to break out of. If Hill parents send their kids to Eastern then the IB diploma rates would be much better. The advanced program everyone claims to want is literally there. All they have to do is send their kids. He’s not wrong. Parents need to organize themselves to send their kids en masse - this is a parent problem.

Exactly. I’m white and volunteered at Eastern over a decade ago.

Snap your fingers, hold a parent meeting or two and, voila, a sizeable cohort of in-boundary families rushes to Eastern for 9th grade. Are you even vaguely aware that very few UMC families in Ward 6 even bother with DCPS middle schools? So they're going to drop out of privates, Latin and BASIS to rush to Eastern as a group? Silly.

If that’s your belief, why are you posting here? So Ward 6 families are a lost cause and Eastern will always be majority OOB.

Like it or not, making a school likr Eastern and IB school takes drive and willpower from parents en masse. And that just is not happening, and it’s the fault od the parents primarily for failing to organize in this particular case. Point being, it is not the principal’s fault.

That is BS. It is not the parents fault. It is DCPS fault for not meeting the needs of these kids and putting kids 3-4 grade levels apart in the same class. Actually have tracking in all courses like all the suburban middle and high schools around do and the families will come.

Instead DCPS only cares about the bottom and lowers academic rigor with the top to close the achievement gap. They DGAF about anybody else.

I’m sorry but I disagree. Granted my experience is with higher performing schools but I had to take my kids out of a Big 3 school because the teachers could not provide a challenge. They would not allow them to skip grade either. DCPS has been wonderful and very accommodating to my kids’ needs. My kids have not been placed in with lower performing students in math or English. My kid’s geography/history teacher had groups of kids at different level within the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is school choice in dc. Parents don’t want to drive across town for a decent high school. Homeowners in ward 6 are very interested in raising their home values by touting awesome schools nearby. Everyone wants eastern to succeed for selfish and not so selfish reasons. But the truth of the matter is that eastern doesn’t care about luring parents to their school. They’re content with doing the bare minimum and watching as Capitol Hill parents go elsewhere. That is a failure.

And everyone here who makes excuses for the school and believes that the principal should only serve the kids at his school contribute to that failure.

They can’t see the forest for the trees and the big picture.

I mean, what ELSE is he supposed to do? Just imagine how outraged DCUM would be if a principal of a high-performing school spent a lot of time advocating for an at-risk set aside OOB for the school, or directing resources towards the bottom performers. I don't even have to imagine, because I already know.

While it is true, and there are examples of, school principals making a concerted effort to get IB families to attend the school, it doesn't follow that a principal is doing something wrong to prioritize the kids *actually at the school.* I'm not exactly sure how it worked at Hardy, but in the examples I know about on the Hill, getting IB buy-in was a family-led effort.

The fact that no one sends their children to their in-boundary public high school because expectations are set so incredibly low is an embarrassment and should be a scandal.

A principal could easily be serving the children attending the school, while taking steps to be welcoming to parents who expect academic rigor. This principal chose not to make the barest of efforts.

The moment you say solutions or actions to correct, remediate or improve public education is "easy" you expose yourself as a fool who is uneducated and unserious about the subject and efforts to improve it.

You think the principal could not “easily … take steps to be welcoming…” Really? That’s SO SO SO HARD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is school choice in dc. Parents don’t want to drive across town for a decent high school. Homeowners in ward 6 are very interested in raising their home values by touting awesome schools nearby. Everyone wants eastern to succeed for selfish and not so selfish reasons. But the truth of the matter is that eastern doesn’t care about luring parents to their school. They’re content with doing the bare minimum and watching as Capitol Hill parents go elsewhere. That is a failure.

And everyone here who makes excuses for the school and believes that the principal should only serve the kids at his school contribute to that failure.

They can’t see the forest for the trees and the big picture.

I mean, what ELSE is he supposed to do? Just imagine how outraged DCUM would be if a principal of a high-performing school spent a lot of time advocating for an at-risk set aside OOB for the school, or directing resources towards the bottom performers. I don't even have to imagine, because I already know.

While it is true, and there are examples of, school principals making a concerted effort to get IB families to attend the school, it doesn't follow that a principal is doing something wrong to prioritize the kids *actually at the school.* I'm not exactly sure how it worked at Hardy, but in the examples I know about on the Hill, getting IB buy-in was a family-led effort.

The fact that no one sends their children to their in-boundary public high school because expectations are set so incredibly low is an embarrassment and should be a scandal.

A principal could easily be serving the children attending the school, while taking steps to be welcoming to parents who expect academic rigor. This principal chose not to make the barest of efforts.

The moment you say solutions or actions to correct, remediate or improve public education is "easy" you expose yourself as a fool who is uneducated and unserious about the subject and efforts to improve it.

You think the principal could not “easily … take steps to be welcoming…” Really? That’s SO SO SO HARD?

This whole thread started bc He went out of his way to meet with the family of a prospective student that wanted to be wooed. That’s pretty welcoming, and it’s unrealistic to expect an already overworked person to have to individually recruit families who think they’re entitled to be recruited for a free education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is school choice in dc. Parents don’t want to drive across town for a decent high school. Homeowners in ward 6 are very interested in raising their home values by touting awesome schools nearby. Everyone wants eastern to succeed for selfish and not so selfish reasons. But the truth of the matter is that eastern doesn’t care about luring parents to their school. They’re content with doing the bare minimum and watching as Capitol Hill parents go elsewhere. That is a failure.

And everyone here who makes excuses for the school and believes that the principal should only serve the kids at his school contribute to that failure.

They can’t see the forest for the trees and the big picture.

I mean, what ELSE is he supposed to do? Just imagine how outraged DCUM would be if a principal of a high-performing school spent a lot of time advocating for an at-risk set aside OOB for the school, or directing resources towards the bottom performers. I don't even have to imagine, because I already know.

While it is true, and there are examples of, school principals making a concerted effort to get IB families to attend the school, it doesn't follow that a principal is doing something wrong to prioritize the kids *actually at the school.* I'm not exactly sure how it worked at Hardy, but in the examples I know about on the Hill, getting IB buy-in was a family-led effort.

The fact that no one sends their children to their in-boundary public high school because expectations are set so incredibly low is an embarrassment and should be a scandal.

A principal could easily be serving the children attending the school, while taking steps to be welcoming to parents who expect academic rigor. This principal chose not to make the barest of efforts.

The moment you say solutions or actions to correct, remediate or improve public education is "easy" you expose yourself as a fool who is uneducated and unserious about the subject and efforts to improve it.

You think the principal could not “easily … take steps to be welcoming…” Really? That’s SO SO SO HARD?

This whole thread started bc He went out of his way to meet with the family of a prospective student that wanted to be wooed. That’s pretty welcoming, and it’s unrealistic to expect an already overworked person to have to individually recruit families who think they’re entitled to be recruited for a free education

perfect summary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is school choice in dc. Parents don’t want to drive across town for a decent high school. Homeowners in ward 6 are very interested in raising their home values by touting awesome schools nearby. Everyone wants eastern to succeed for selfish and not so selfish reasons. But the truth of the matter is that eastern doesn’t care about luring parents to their school. They’re content with doing the bare minimum and watching as Capitol Hill parents go elsewhere. That is a failure.

And everyone here who makes excuses for the school and believes that the principal should only serve the kids at his school contribute to that failure.

They can’t see the forest for the trees and the big picture.

I mean, what ELSE is he supposed to do? Just imagine how outraged DCUM would be if a principal of a high-performing school spent a lot of time advocating for an at-risk set aside OOB for the school, or directing resources towards the bottom performers. I don't even have to imagine, because I already know.

While it is true, and there are examples of, school principals making a concerted effort to get IB families to attend the school, it doesn't follow that a principal is doing something wrong to prioritize the kids *actually at the school.* I'm not exactly sure how it worked at Hardy, but in the examples I know about on the Hill, getting IB buy-in was a family-led effort.

The fact that no one sends their children to their in-boundary public high school because expectations are set so incredibly low is an embarrassment and should be a scandal.

A principal could easily be serving the children attending the school, while taking steps to be welcoming to parents who expect academic rigor. This principal chose not to make the barest of efforts.

The moment you say solutions or actions to correct, remediate or improve public education is "easy" you expose yourself as a fool who is uneducated and unserious about the subject and efforts to improve it.

You think the principal could not “easily … take steps to be welcoming…” Really? That’s SO SO SO HARD?

This whole thread started bc He went out of his way to meet with the family of a prospective student that wanted to be wooed. That’s pretty welcoming, and it’s unrealistic to expect an already overworked person to have to individually recruit families who think they’re entitled to be recruited for a free education

The principal and AP at our ES does it regularly. Seeking information and an understanding of the environment is not “wanting to be wooed.” No one is asking to treated to gifts and entreaties, or meet repeatedly and take up hours of the principal’s time..

(Is this just one person that keeps describing meeting with a principal as wanting to be “catered to” or “wooed”?! It’s such an odd characterization of a normal thing.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is school choice in dc. Parents don’t want to drive across town for a decent high school. Homeowners in ward 6 are very interested in raising their home values by touting awesome schools nearby. Everyone wants eastern to succeed for selfish and not so selfish reasons. But the truth of the matter is that eastern doesn’t care about luring parents to their school. They’re content with doing the bare minimum and watching as Capitol Hill parents go elsewhere. That is a failure.

And everyone here who makes excuses for the school and believes that the principal should only serve the kids at his school contribute to that failure.

They can’t see the forest for the trees and the big picture.

I mean, what ELSE is he supposed to do? Just imagine how outraged DCUM would be if a principal of a high-performing school spent a lot of time advocating for an at-risk set aside OOB for the school, or directing resources towards the bottom performers. I don't even have to imagine, because I already know.

While it is true, and there are examples of, school principals making a concerted effort to get IB families to attend the school, it doesn't follow that a principal is doing something wrong to prioritize the kids *actually at the school.* I'm not exactly sure how it worked at Hardy, but in the examples I know about on the Hill, getting IB buy-in was a family-led effort.

The fact that no one sends their children to their in-boundary public high school because expectations are set so incredibly low is an embarrassment and should be a scandal.

A principal could easily be serving the children attending the school, while taking steps to be welcoming to parents who expect academic rigor. This principal chose not to make the barest of efforts.

The moment you say solutions or actions to correct, remediate or improve public education is "easy" you expose yourself as a fool who is uneducated and unserious about the subject and efforts to improve it.

You think the principal could not “easily … take steps to be welcoming…” Really? That’s SO SO SO HARD?

This whole thread started bc He went out of his way to meet with the family of a prospective student that wanted to be wooed. That’s pretty welcoming, and it’s unrealistic to expect an already overworked person to have to individually recruit families who think they’re entitled to be recruited for a free education

The principal and AP at our ES does it regularly. Seeking information and an understanding of the environment is not “wanting to be wooed.” No one is asking to treated to gifts and entreaties, or meet repeatedly and take up hours of the principal’s time..

(Is this just one person that keeps describing meeting with a principal as wanting to be “catered to” or “wooed”?! It’s such an odd characterization of a normal thing.)

Dcps schools already have open houses, enrollment fairs, tours, community events, and other ways to connect. Not to mention an ES is significantly smaller than a HS population

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is school choice in dc. Parents don’t want to drive across town for a decent high school. Homeowners in ward 6 are very interested in raising their home values by touting awesome schools nearby. Everyone wants eastern to succeed for selfish and not so selfish reasons. But the truth of the matter is that eastern doesn’t care about luring parents to their school. They’re content with doing the bare minimum and watching as Capitol Hill parents go elsewhere. That is a failure.

And everyone here who makes excuses for the school and believes that the principal should only serve the kids at his school contribute to that failure.

They can’t see the forest for the trees and the big picture.

I mean, what ELSE is he supposed to do? Just imagine how outraged DCUM would be if a principal of a high-performing school spent a lot of time advocating for an at-risk set aside OOB for the school, or directing resources towards the bottom performers. I don't even have to imagine, because I already know.

While it is true, and there are examples of, school principals making a concerted effort to get IB families to attend the school, it doesn't follow that a principal is doing something wrong to prioritize the kids *actually at the school.* I'm not exactly sure how it worked at Hardy, but in the examples I know about on the Hill, getting IB buy-in was a family-led effort.

The fact that no one sends their children to their in-boundary public high school because expectations are set so incredibly low is an embarrassment and should be a scandal.

A principal could easily be serving the children attending the school, while taking steps to be welcoming to parents who expect academic rigor. This principal chose not to make the barest of efforts.

The moment you say solutions or actions to correct, remediate or improve public education is "easy" you expose yourself as a fool who is uneducated and unserious about the subject and efforts to improve it.

You think the principal could not “easily … take steps to be welcoming…” Really? That’s SO SO SO HARD?

This whole thread started bc He went out of his way to meet with the family of a prospective student that wanted to be wooed. That’s pretty welcoming, and it’s unrealistic to expect an already overworked person to have to individually recruit families who think they’re entitled to be recruited for a free education

perfect summary.

-1

This thread started because an inbound family went out of their way to give Eastern a chance, met with the principal and he failed to answer basic questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is school choice in dc. Parents don’t want to drive across town for a decent high school. Homeowners in ward 6 are very interested in raising their home values by touting awesome schools nearby. Everyone wants eastern to succeed for selfish and not so selfish reasons. But the truth of the matter is that eastern doesn’t care about luring parents to their school. They’re content with doing the bare minimum and watching as Capitol Hill parents go elsewhere. That is a failure.

And everyone here who makes excuses for the school and believes that the principal should only serve the kids at his school contribute to that failure.

They can’t see the forest for the trees and the big picture.

I mean, what ELSE is he supposed to do? Just imagine how outraged DCUM would be if a principal of a high-performing school spent a lot of time advocating for an at-risk set aside OOB for the school, or directing resources towards the bottom performers. I don't even have to imagine, because I already know.

While it is true, and there are examples of, school principals making a concerted effort to get IB families to attend the school, it doesn't follow that a principal is doing something wrong to prioritize the kids *actually at the school.* I'm not exactly sure how it worked at Hardy, but in the examples I know about on the Hill, getting IB buy-in was a family-led effort.

The fact that no one sends their children to their in-boundary public high school because expectations are set so incredibly low is an embarrassment and should be a scandal.

A principal could easily be serving the children attending the school, while taking steps to be welcoming to parents who expect academic rigor. This principal chose not to make the barest of efforts.

The moment you say solutions or actions to correct, remediate or improve public education is "easy" you expose yourself as a fool who is uneducated and unserious about the subject and efforts to improve it.

You think the principal could not “easily … take steps to be welcoming…” Really? That’s SO SO SO HARD?

This whole thread started bc He went out of his way to meet with the family of a prospective student that wanted to be wooed. That’s pretty welcoming, and it’s unrealistic to expect an already overworked person to have to individually recruit families who think they’re entitled to be recruited for a free education

perfect summary.

-1

This thread started because an inbound family went out of their way to give Eastern a chance, met with the principal and he failed to answer basic questions.

Thank you for proving my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That principal?!

We live on Capitol Hill. My spouse and I met with Brown when when we were looking into the IB Diploma program at Eastern for our oldest in early 2020, before the pandemic began.

Brown seemed clueless about what it would take to attract high SES in-boundary families like ours to Eastern, without any real interest in doing so. He claimed that the program offered "real rigor and challenge to all" repeatedly, and wouldn't answer our questions about Eastern's average IBD points totals. He also wouldn't talk about how many of the "full Diploma" students at Eastern actually earn the Diploma.

Later on, we learned that Eastern's average points total has been mired in the mid 20s, on a 24-45 points pass scale, since the program's inception a decade ago. We also learned that most of the Eastern students who try to earn the Diploma have failed since the get go. We left the meeting unimpressed with Brown and Eastern's IBD program and didn't enroll our child.

So, let me get this right. You walked into this man’s office with your white hood on, took it off, handed it to him and asked him to put it on. He rebuffed your offer and you decided you didn’t like him. Eastern HS kids test poorly due to various reasons (poverty, trauma, inequality, etc). He does not have to explain any of that to you. Your child could have obtained a good education there, but your classism and racism prevented you from entertaining the thought of your child in that school.

ha ha, normally I dislike this kind of invective, but seems to hit the mark.

PP who talked to Brown. My spouse and I are people of color who come from working-class backgrounds. We attended college on full Pell Grants.

We wouldn't have bothered going to Eastern to speak to Brown if we hadn't been trying to keep an open mind. What are you posters slamming us celebrating? Brown's able leadership at Eastern?

I agree with you. I work for a neighborhood organization and Principal Sah asked for a meeting with us. He said he was interested in attracting more in-boundariy students but he was clueless how to do it. He shot down any ideas that were brought up and acted like in-boundary students should attend just because. It was a weird meeting

So basically it’s the same prisoners dilemma that none of us know how to break out of. If Hill parents send their kids to Eastern then the IB diploma rates would be much better. The advanced program everyone claims to want is literally there. All they have to do is send their kids. He’s not wrong. Parents need to organize themselves to send their kids en masse - this is a parent problem.

Exactly. I’m white and volunteered at Eastern over a decade ago.

Snap your fingers, hold a parent meeting or two and, voila, a sizeable cohort of in-boundary families rushes to Eastern for 9th grade. Are you even vaguely aware that very few UMC families in Ward 6 even bother with DCPS middle schools? So they're going to drop out of privates, Latin and BASIS to rush to Eastern as a group? Silly.

If that’s your belief, why are you posting here? So Ward 6 families are a lost cause and Eastern will always be majority OOB.

Like it or not, making a school likr Eastern and IB school takes drive and willpower from parents en masse. And that just is not happening, and it’s the fault od the parents primarily for failing to organize in this particular case. Point being, it is not the principal’s fault.

That is BS. It is not the parents fault. It is DCPS fault for not meeting the needs of these kids and putting kids 3-4 grade levels apart in the same class. Actually have tracking in all courses like all the suburban middle and high schools around do and the families will come.

Instead DCPS only cares about the bottom and lowers academic rigor with the top to close the achievement gap. They DGAF about anybody else.

I’m sorry but I disagree. Granted my experience is with higher performing schools but I had to take my kids out of a Big 3 school because the teachers could not provide a challenge. They would not allow them to skip grade either. DCPS has been wonderful and very accommodating to my kids’ needs. My kids have not been placed in with lower performing students in math or English. My kid’s geography/history teacher had groups of kids at different level within the class.

Sounds like early elementary grades. High Schools don't really do anything close..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what did the wealthy parents at Jackson-Reed do that "made it better?"

Didn't pull out their well prepared kid? Demanded appropriate classes?

This is "made it better?"

I mean... yes. How do you think the majority of schools in DC improved? There's a cycle of buy in leading to more buy in leading to better offerings and more parental funding leading to more buy in leading to higher expectations leading to, etc, etc. Like yes, I genuinely believe that gentrification in DC has improved schools.

Sure, if your unit of measure is the building and not the humans inside the building. The kids who previously attended those schools are now priced out of the neighborhood, and they are being poor and having achievement issues somewhere else. But DCUM doesn’t seem to care about that.

Can you say more about what this means? Unless they were in rentals before they weren't priced out of somewhere they did not live. If what you are suggesting is that they lived OOB and because the IB population started sending their kids there, that's not "being priced out" and in fact that's what the IB preference policy design was design to achieve - neighborhood schools.

So I'm asking seriously, what does the bolded section above mean?

I’m the PP and I really don’t understand this question. PP posted explicit literal praise of gentrification. Do you not know that that word means? It’s the process of a neighborhood that was previously poor and usually minority becoming middle class and then sometimes upper middle class or wealthy. Real estate prices go up, taxes go up as comps increase and rents go way up. I live in Adams Morgan. Twenty five years ago, this was a largely Latine neighborhood. Now, a condo is $1.1 mil and rents have risen accordingly. The extremely desirable in boundary immersion school that used to be able to fill 50% of its Spanish dominant slots with meighborhood kids can’t anymore because those families have been priced out. That’s gentrification. What is not clear?

[Anonymous]

Agree with you in Adams Morgan gentrifying - I’d just note it was mostly gentrified 20 years ago at this point.

[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:That principal?!

We live on Capitol Hill. My spouse and I met with Brown when when we were looking into the IB Diploma program at Eastern for our oldest in early 2020, before the pandemic began.

Brown seemed clueless about what it would take to attract high SES in-boundary families like ours to Eastern, without any real interest in doing so. He claimed that the program offered "real rigor and challenge to all" repeatedly, and wouldn't answer our questions about Eastern's average IBD points totals. He also wouldn't talk about how many of the "full Diploma" students at Eastern actually earn the Diploma.

Later on, we learned that Eastern's average points total has been mired in the mid 20s, on a 24-45 points pass scale, since the program's inception a decade ago. We also learned that most of the Eastern students who try to earn the Diploma have failed since the get go. We left the meeting unimpressed with Brown and Eastern's IBD program and didn't enroll our child.

So, let me get this right. You walked into this man’s office with your white hood on, took it off, handed it to him and asked him to put it on. He rebuffed your offer and you decided you didn’t like him. Eastern HS kids test poorly due to various reasons (poverty, trauma, inequality, etc). He does not have to explain any of that to you. Your child could have obtained a good education there, but your classism and racism prevented you from entertaining the thought of your child in that school.

ha ha, normally I dislike this kind of invective, but seems to hit the mark.

PP who talked to Brown. My spouse and I are people of color who come from working-class backgrounds. We attended college on full Pell Grants.

We wouldn't have bothered going to Eastern to speak to Brown if we hadn't been trying to keep an open mind. What are you posters slamming us celebrating? Brown's able leadership at Eastern?

I agree with you. I work for a neighborhood organization and Principal Sah asked for a meeting with us. He said he was interested in attracting more in-boundariy students but he was clueless how to do it. He shot down any ideas that were brought up and acted like in-boundary students should attend just because. It was a weird meeting

So basically it’s the same prisoners dilemma that none of us know how to break out of. If Hill parents send their kids to Eastern then the IB diploma rates would be much better. The advanced program everyone claims to want is literally there. All they have to do is send their kids. He’s not wrong. Parents need to organize themselves to send their kids en masse - this is a parent problem.

Exactly. I’m white and volunteered at Eastern over a decade ago.

Snap your fingers, hold a parent meeting or two and, voila, a sizeable cohort of in-boundary families rushes to Eastern for 9th grade. Are you even vaguely aware that very few UMC families in Ward 6 even bother with DCPS middle schools? So they're going to drop out of privates, Latin and BASIS to rush to Eastern as a group? Silly.

If that’s your belief, why are you posting here? So Ward 6 families are a lost cause and Eastern will always be majority OOB.

Like it or not, making a school likr Eastern and IB school takes drive and willpower from parents en masse. And that just is not happening, and it’s the fault od the parents primarily for failing to organize in this particular case. Point being, it is not the principal’s fault.

That is BS. It is not the parents fault. It is DCPS fault for not meeting the needs of these kids and putting kids 3-4 grade levels apart in the same class. Actually have tracking in all courses like all the suburban middle and high schools around do and the families will come.

Instead DCPS only cares about the bottom and lowers academic rigor with the top to close the achievement gap. They DGAF about anybody else.

I’m sorry but I disagree. Granted my experience is with higher performing schools but I had to take my kids out of a Big 3 school because the teachers could not provide a challenge. They would not allow them to skip grade either. DCPS has been wonderful and very accommodating to my kids’ needs. My kids have not been placed in with lower performing students in math or English. My kid’s geography/history teacher had groups of kids at different level within the class.

Sounds like early elementary grades. High Schools don't really do anything close..

Agreed. My kids went from Deal to a Big3 for high school and it's been about 5 times the work of DCPS. It was a rough transition. DCPS isn't in the same stratosphere as the Big3 at the high school level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what did the wealthy parents at Jackson-Reed do that "made it better?"

Didn't pull out their well prepared kid? Demanded appropriate classes?

This is "made it better?"

I mean... yes. How do you think the majority of schools in DC improved? There's a cycle of buy in leading to more buy in leading to better offerings and more parental funding leading to more buy in leading to higher expectations leading to, etc, etc. Like yes, I genuinely believe that gentrification in DC has improved schools.

Sure, if your unit of measure is the building and not the humans inside the building. The kids who previously attended those schools are now priced out of the neighborhood, and they are being poor and having achievement issues somewhere else. But DCUM doesn’t seem to care about that.

Can you say more about what this means? Unless they were in rentals before they weren't priced out of somewhere they did not live. If what you are suggesting is that they lived OOB and because the IB population started sending their kids there, that's not "being priced out" and in fact that's what the IB preference policy design was design to achieve - neighborhood schools.

So I'm asking seriously, what does the bolded section above mean?

I’m the PP and I really don’t understand this question. PP posted explicit literal praise of gentrification. Do you not know that that word means? It’s the process of a neighborhood that was previously poor and usually minority becoming middle class and then sometimes upper middle class or wealthy. Real estate prices go up, taxes go up as comps increase and rents go way up. I live in Adams Morgan. Twenty five years ago, this was a largely Latine neighborhood. Now, a condo is $1.1 mil and rents have risen accordingly. The extremely desirable in boundary immersion school that used to be able to fill 50% of its Spanish dominant slots with meighborhood kids can’t anymore because those families have been priced out. That’s gentrification. What is not clear?

Couple of things.

First, Adams Morgan was gentrified 20 years ago or so. The fact that you think it is recent tells me you don't actually know anything about the "real" inhabitants about whom you speak.

Second, your position on this ignores one of the realities of gentrification in DC; namely that long term black resident homeowners sold their properties (in some cases to white people) and created generational wealth as a result. There are studies that show a material portion of the wealth in PG County (wealthiest majority black county in the US) was created from real estate sales in DC before they relocated. Your binary and overly simplistic narrative ignores or diminishes the wealth created by black homeowners when they sold.

Third, your reference to long term homeowners being priced out based on increased property taxes leads me to wonder whether you actually live in DC. Surely you don't own property in DC. I conclude this because if you understood DC property taxes you'd know that owner occupant property taxes are capped at a max increase per year. This means that a homeowner who owned, say 30 years ago, would have had property taxes so so low that a max increase would not have resulted in them catching up even today. There is also a homeowners credit and low income credit designed to assist. I am aware of no known data or studies in DC that show meaningful property sales as a consequence of increased property taxes.

Finally, and most importantly, your answer didn't actually respond to the question posed. There is no data of which I am aware showing displacement of renters in Northeast or Southeast DC neighborhoods where gentrification is now creating virtually all IB ES.

What has happened in a lot of NE and SE schools (ES particularly) is that IB families started buying in and sending their kids. This surely displaced 2nd or 3rd generations of students that were ALWAYS OOB but attending LT, Maury, etc. That IB influx surely prevented those OOB kids from attending, but that was how IB preference and creating neighborhood schools was designed to work. If DC had wanted to create priority for kids whose moms or grandmothers attended an ES they could have done so. They didn't.

TL: DR Screaming "GENTRIFICATION" and then providing a definition doesn't remotely explain how it is impacting school enrollments. I'd also note that the schools that are disproportionately white (as compared to DC as a whole) are charters that are pure lottery, so gentrification isn't having a direct impact. And before you argue that somehow DC has been black for 100s of years - don't. The demographics of DC as a black city were created in the 60's and started to abate in the 90s. If you have lived here for as long as you pretend to you'd know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That principal?!

We live on Capitol Hill. My spouse and I met with Brown when when we were looking into the IB Diploma program at Eastern for our oldest in early 2020, before the pandemic began.

Brown seemed clueless about what it would take to attract high SES in-boundary families like ours to Eastern, without any real interest in doing so. He claimed that the program offered "real rigor and challenge to all" repeatedly, and wouldn't answer our questions about Eastern's average IBD points totals. He also wouldn't talk about how many of the "full Diploma" students at Eastern actually earn the Diploma.

Later on, we learned that Eastern's average points total has been mired in the mid 20s, on a 24-45 points pass scale, since the program's inception a decade ago. We also learned that most of the Eastern students who try to earn the Diploma have failed since the get go. We left the meeting unimpressed with Brown and Eastern's IBD program and didn't enroll our child.

So, let me get this right. You walked into this man’s office with your white hood on, took it off, handed it to him and asked him to put it on. He rebuffed your offer and you decided you didn’t like him. Eastern HS kids test poorly due to various reasons (poverty, trauma, inequality, etc). He does not have to explain any of that to you. Your child could have obtained a good education there, but your classism and racism prevented you from entertaining the thought of your child in that school.

ha ha, normally I dislike this kind of invective, but seems to hit the mark.

PP who talked to Brown. My spouse and I are people of color who come from working-class backgrounds. We attended college on full Pell Grants.

We wouldn't have bothered going to Eastern to speak to Brown if we hadn't been trying to keep an open mind. What are you posters slamming us celebrating? Brown's able leadership at Eastern?

I agree with you. I work for a neighborhood organization and Principal Sah asked for a meeting with us. He said he was interested in attracting more in-boundariy students but he was clueless how to do it. He shot down any ideas that were brought up and acted like in-boundary students should attend just because. It was a weird meeting

So basically it’s the same prisoners dilemma that none of us know how to break out of. If Hill parents send their kids to Eastern then the IB diploma rates would be much better. The advanced program everyone claims to want is literally there. All they have to do is send their kids. He’s not wrong. Parents need to organize themselves to send their kids en masse - this is a parent problem.

Exactly. I’m white and volunteered at Eastern over a decade ago.

Snap your fingers, hold a parent meeting or two and, voila, a sizeable cohort of in-boundary families rushes to Eastern for 9th grade. Are you even vaguely aware that very few UMC families in Ward 6 even bother with DCPS middle schools? So they're going to drop out of privates, Latin and BASIS to rush to Eastern as a group? Silly.

If that’s your belief, why are you posting here? So Ward 6 families are a lost cause and Eastern will always be majority OOB.

Like it or not, making a school likr Eastern and IB school takes drive and willpower from parents en masse. And that just is not happening, and it’s the fault od the parents primarily for failing to organize in this particular case. Point being, it is not the principal’s fault.

That is BS. It is not the parents fault. It is DCPS fault for not meeting the needs of these kids and putting kids 3-4 grade levels apart in the same class. Actually have tracking in all courses like all the suburban middle and high schools around do and the families will come.

Instead DCPS only cares about the bottom and lowers academic rigor with the top to close the achievement gap. They DGAF about anybody else.

I’m sorry but I disagree. Granted my experience is with higher performing schools but I had to take my kids out of a Big 3 school because the teachers could not provide a challenge. They would not allow them to skip grade either. DCPS has been wonderful and very accommodating to my kids’ needs. My kids have not been placed in with lower performing students in math or English. My kid’s geography/history teacher had groups of kids at different level within the class.

We are talking high school here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what did the wealthy parents at Jackson-Reed do that "made it better?"

Didn't pull out their well prepared kid? Demanded appropriate classes?

This is "made it better?"

I mean... yes. How do you think the majority of schools in DC improved? There's a cycle of buy in leading to more buy in leading to better offerings and more parental funding leading to more buy in leading to higher expectations leading to, etc, etc. Like yes, I genuinely believe that gentrification in DC has improved schools.

Sure, if your unit of measure is the building and not the humans inside the building. The kids who previously attended those schools are now priced out of the neighborhood, and they are being poor and having achievement issues somewhere else. But DCUM doesn’t seem to care about that.

Can you say more about what this means? Unless they were in rentals before they weren't priced out of somewhere they did not live. If what you are suggesting is that they lived OOB and because the IB population started sending their kids there, that's not "being priced out" and in fact that's what the IB preference policy design was design to achieve - neighborhood schools.

So I'm asking seriously, what does the bolded section above mean?

I’m the PP and I really don’t understand this question. PP posted explicit literal praise of gentrification. Do you not know that that word means? It’s the process of a neighborhood that was previously poor and usually minority becoming middle class and then sometimes upper middle class or wealthy. Real estate prices go up, taxes go up as comps increase and rents go way up. I live in Adams Morgan. Twenty five years ago, this was a largely Latine neighborhood. Now, a condo is $1.1 mil and rents have risen accordingly. The extremely desirable in boundary immersion school that used to be able to fill 50% of its Spanish dominant slots with meighborhood kids can’t anymore because those families have been priced out. That’s gentrification. What is not clear?

Couple of things.

First, Adams Morgan was gentrified 20 years ago or so. The fact that you think it is recent tells me you don't actually know anything about the "real" inhabitants about whom you speak.

Second, your position on this ignores one of the realities of gentrification in DC; namely that long term black resident homeowners sold their properties (in some cases to white people) and created generational wealth as a result. There are studies that show a material portion of the wealth in PG County (wealthiest majority black county in the US) was created from real estate sales in DC before they relocated. Your binary and overly simplistic narrative ignores or diminishes the wealth created by black homeowners when they sold.

Third, your reference to long term homeowners being priced out based on increased property taxes leads me to wonder whether you actually live in DC. Surely you don't own property in DC. I conclude this because if you understood DC property taxes you'd know that owner occupant property taxes are capped at a max increase per year. This means that a homeowner who owned, say 30 years ago, would have had property taxes so so low that a max increase would not have resulted in them catching up even today. There is also a homeowners credit and low income credit designed to assist. I am aware of no known data or studies in DC that show meaningful property sales as a consequence of increased property taxes.

Finally, and most importantly, your answer didn't actually respond to the question posed. There is no data of which I am aware showing displacement of renters in Northeast or Southeast DC neighborhoods where gentrification is now creating virtually all IB ES.

What has happened in a lot of NE and SE schools (ES particularly) is that IB families started buying in and sending their kids. This surely displaced 2nd or 3rd generations of students that were ALWAYS OOB but attending LT, Maury, etc. That IB influx surely prevented those OOB kids from attending, but that was how IB preference and creating neighborhood schools was designed to work. If DC had wanted to create priority for kids whose moms or grandmothers attended an ES they could have done so. They didn't.

TL: DR Screaming "GENTRIFICATION" and then providing a definition doesn't remotely explain how it is impacting school enrollments. I'd also note that the schools that are disproportionately white (as compared to DC as a whole) are charters that are pure lottery, so gentrification isn't having a direct impact. And before you argue that somehow DC has been black for 100s of years - don't. The demographics of DC as a black city were created in the 60's and started to abate in the 90s. If you have lived here for as long as you pretend to you'd know that.

You seem confused. I said Adams Morgan changed 25 years ago. You invented a strawmen here.

I also talked about rents. Your tangent about homeownership is another strawman. You do realize that homeownership rates among low income, urban minority people are really low, right?

Your weird point about DC as black city for hundreds of years was another strawman. I have white extended family who have lived in DC for generations, and I remember visiting them here in the 60s. My great aunt was a proud DCPS grad. You may not be aware, but DC has a pretty complicated history with race that goes back much further than the 60s. You may want to google to origin of the name of my neighborhood and, for example, the history of the FT Reno area to start learning about it.

As for schools being disproportionately white vis a vis the demographics of the city —- do you not live here? Your post seems to reflect zero knowledge of the demographics of Janney, Heart, Murch, Lafayette, etc.

Of course, the wall of text that you wrote didn’t address the clear example of gentrification displacing IB families that I provided - Oyster ES. Care to try again?