Middle Schools for Cap Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we even parsing SH vs Jefferson? Neither is a good choice for kids on a college track. I went to the SH open house a few years ago and the principal was touting that they allowed certain 8th graders to take algebra 1 and that was impressive as a “high school” course. I left about 10 minutes into the open house knowing the school was not for us. Anyone who is on a college track takes algebra 1 in MS. If your MS does not offer it at a bare minimum there is a problem. The mediocrity that hill parents are conditioned to expect is astounding.

Things have improved. A few years is a long time on CH. Some SH 7th graders and many 8th graders now take algebra, along with honors ELA. It's the non-differentiated science and social studies that scare parents.

I thought SH put every kid in "honors ELA." If that is indeed the case, I don't understand how it's honors...

That’s not correct. SH tracks ELA and math. One is honors; one is not.

Honors in name only. Grade level. Not challenging for my kid, ELA, math, science, social studies. We're not returning to SH in in the fall. Going private after getting a lot of financial aid.

[Anonymous]

I wish that UMC CH families had boycotted all 3 mediocre or bad DCPS middle schools as a protest vote long ago. They could have joined forces to hold out for one good Deal type option. With a few high SES families using these schools, DCPS is in a good position to call more than 80% of us elitist/racist, leaving things at that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish that UMC CH families had boycotted all 3 mediocre or bad DCPS middle schools as a protest vote long ago. They could have joined forces to hold out for one good Deal type option. With a few high SES families using these schools, DCPS is in a good position to call more than 80% of us elitist/racist, leaving things at that.

This is not a thing that all CH families can afford to do. Incredible that you can't see your privilege here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish that UMC CH families had boycotted all 3 mediocre or bad DCPS middle schools as a protest vote long ago. They could have joined forces to hold out for one good Deal type option. With a few high SES families using these schools, DCPS is in a good position to call more than 80% of us elitist/racist, leaving things at that.

You miss completely the fact that DCPS itself doesn’t care one tiny bit if UMC families bug out or protest. Principals ( like Dohmann at Jefferson ) do care because those high PARCC scores are awfully tasty. So the principals will do or say what sounds good to UMC families as far as within their abilities; but do not expect DCPS to support or care. In fact the opposite. Central Office administrators, etc. will be knocked professionally if they do anything that does not amount to closing the racial and socioeconomic achievement gap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is it worth changing from a jefferson feeder to a hobson feeder? distance is about the same.

I'm sure you will hear from Jefferson boosters on here... but if you care about the size of the cohort of high performing kids & the size of the cohort of truly low performing kids, SH is a no brainer. ELA is where the huge difference is and that's the skill that's more transferable to the non-tracked classes like science & social studies. SH has 6% of kids getting 1s on PARCC... Jefferson has 26%. So, in one setting, your kid's class might have 1 or 2 kids *way* below grade level (illiterate or close to it, if we're being honest); in the other, it's fully 1/4th of the class. On the flip side, SH has over 50% of kids at grade level for ELA, so even the non-tracked classes are majority kids who have the tools to do the work; at Jefferson, it's just over 1/3.

A few responses to this:

* You are judging the two schools based solely on 2018-19 PARCC data and no other factors. I would suggest that there is far more to consider when weighing school options, particularly since none of that test data reflects the performance or aptitude of any of the kids who currently attend either school.

* While you are correct that the 2018-2019 data showed a significant difference in ELA proficiency (56% at Stuart-Hobson versus 37% at Jefferson), you did not mention that the math proficiency of the two schools was very similar that year (23% and 21%, respectively).

* The percentage of Jefferson students receiving a 1 in ELA in 2018-2019 was actually 23%, not 26%. I realize that it's a small difference -- and that it wasn't a good number in any case. But if you're going to rely solely on 2018-2019 PARCC data to judge the schools, at least be accurate, particularly if you're going to use phrases like "fully 1/4th."

* I would argue that math is more transferable to science than is ELA. And if f you're going to classify kids as "illiterate" for receiving a 1 on ELA, then how do you classify those who received a 1 in math in 2018-2019 (17% at Stuart-Hobson and 23% at Jefferson)?

* It bears repeating that all of these numbers are from 2018-2019 and do not in any way reflect the performance or aptitude of any of the current students at Jefferson or Stuart-Hobson.

* In the latest U.S. and World Report rankings, Jefferson is the considered third best standalone DCSP middle school, behind only Deal and Hardy. Stuart-Hobson is fourth in that category. Point being, those of us in Ward 6 have relatively good options for middle schools, despite all of the complaining of some on here.

* Regardless of which school may be "better," I don't think it's worth uprooting a kid from his or her current elementary school just for a change in the feeder pattern. For the past couple of years, Stuart-Hobson has been relatively easy to get into through the lottery. For 2021-2022, it made 91 waitlist offers for sixth grade. The year before that it made 135. (Some of the current students at Jefferson received waitlist offers for Stuart-Hobson but remained with Jefferson, while some kids who had been Jefferson-bound switched to Stuart-Hobson. Each family had its own reasons for its decision.)

Jefferson booster is here! I said if you care about the size of the high performing cohort and low performing cohort; some may not and have other things they value more. I specifically said ELA is where the huge difference is, so I’m not sure where you get that I didn’t acknowledge I was talking about ELA specifically. Math has very little transference to the BS middle school science class both schools are doing. This isn’t BASIS real physics. It’s like Earth Science at most. There’s a reason that ESes drill reading even to the detriment of math. Innumeracy doesn’t make you unable to read your science textbook… you know what does? (You’re right about 23 v 26; my apologies.)

You said that "if you care" about these factors, then it's a "no brainer." You are apparently disregarding everyone who does, in fact, care about these factors but who also takes into account other factors in considering schools. It's not as simple as "caring" or "not."

Apologies accepted.

Yeah, sorry. If you care at all about the size of the cohorts, I think it’s a no brainer. No apologies from me. Jefferson has too many really low performing kids and not enough high performing ones. No apologies for that reality.

You are apparently treating the 2018-2019 PARCC data as the end-all-be-all for determining how well students are performing at a given school. You apparently have no direct experience with Jefferson or with how kids there are placed in specific cohorts. Citing PARCC data that anyone can easily look up themselves adds absolutely nothing of value to the conversation.

Look, I get it that you chose not to send your kid(s) to Jefferson. That's perfectly fine. The school is not for everyone -- nor is any other school.

As long as we're going to play this game, why don't you tell us which middle school you did choose. Then those of us who have no experience with that school can tell you what's wrong with it.

This is the problem with Jefferson boosters. Talking about the size of various cohorts at the school is not an attack on you or your choices.

Please. I'm not buying your “aw shucks, I’m just discussing the size of cohorts” routine. You’re going far beyond that. You’re asserting that it’s a “no brainer” for anyone who cares about this issue to not choose Jefferson. As if those of us who send our kids there simply don’t care. That is an attack, whether you intend it to be or not.

In any event, you have no personal experience with the school or with how students there are placed in cohorts for their math, ELA, science and social studies classes. You therefore don't have anything of significant value to add to the discussion. Yet here you are. Again and again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is it worth changing from a jefferson feeder to a hobson feeder? distance is about the same.

I'm sure you will hear from Jefferson boosters on here... but if you care about the size of the cohort of high performing kids & the size of the cohort of truly low performing kids, SH is a no brainer. ELA is where the huge difference is and that's the skill that's more transferable to the non-tracked classes like science & social studies. SH has 6% of kids getting 1s on PARCC... Jefferson has 26%. So, in one setting, your kid's class might have 1 or 2 kids *way* below grade level (illiterate or close to it, if we're being honest); in the other, it's fully 1/4th of the class. On the flip side, SH has over 50% of kids at grade level for ELA, so even the non-tracked classes are majority kids who have the tools to do the work; at Jefferson, it's just over 1/3.

A few responses to this:

* You are judging the two schools based solely on 2018-19 PARCC data and no other factors. I would suggest that there is far more to consider when weighing school options, particularly since none of that test data reflects the performance or aptitude of any of the kids who currently attend either school.

* While you are correct that the 2018-2019 data showed a significant difference in ELA proficiency (56% at Stuart-Hobson versus 37% at Jefferson), you did not mention that the math proficiency of the two schools was very similar that year (23% and 21%, respectively).

* The percentage of Jefferson students receiving a 1 in ELA in 2018-2019 was actually 23%, not 26%. I realize that it's a small difference -- and that it wasn't a good number in any case. But if you're going to rely solely on 2018-2019 PARCC data to judge the schools, at least be accurate, particularly if you're going to use phrases like "fully 1/4th."

* I would argue that math is more transferable to science than is ELA. And if f you're going to classify kids as "illiterate" for receiving a 1 on ELA, then how do you classify those who received a 1 in math in 2018-2019 (17% at Stuart-Hobson and 23% at Jefferson)?

* It bears repeating that all of these numbers are from 2018-2019 and do not in any way reflect the performance or aptitude of any of the current students at Jefferson or Stuart-Hobson.

* In the latest U.S. and World Report rankings, Jefferson is the considered third best standalone DCSP middle school, behind only Deal and Hardy. Stuart-Hobson is fourth in that category. Point being, those of us in Ward 6 have relatively good options for middle schools, despite all of the complaining of some on here.

* Regardless of which school may be "better," I don't think it's worth uprooting a kid from his or her current elementary school just for a change in the feeder pattern. For the past couple of years, Stuart-Hobson has been relatively easy to get into through the lottery. For 2021-2022, it made 91 waitlist offers for sixth grade. The year before that it made 135. (Some of the current students at Jefferson received waitlist offers for Stuart-Hobson but remained with Jefferson, while some kids who had been Jefferson-bound switched to Stuart-Hobson. Each family had its own reasons for its decision.)

Jefferson booster is here! I said if you care about the size of the high performing cohort and low performing cohort; some may not and have other things they value more. I specifically said ELA is where the huge difference is, so I’m not sure where you get that I didn’t acknowledge I was talking about ELA specifically. Math has very little transference to the BS middle school science class both schools are doing. This isn’t BASIS real physics. It’s like Earth Science at most. There’s a reason that ESes drill reading even to the detriment of math. Innumeracy doesn’t make you unable to read your science textbook… you know what does? (You’re right about 23 v 26; my apologies.)

You said that "if you care" about these factors, then it's a "no brainer." You are apparently disregarding everyone who does, in fact, care about these factors but who also takes into account other factors in considering schools. It's not as simple as "caring" or "not."

Apologies accepted.

Yeah, sorry. If you care at all about the size of the cohorts, I think it’s a no brainer. No apologies from me. Jefferson has too many really low performing kids and not enough high performing ones. No apologies for that reality.

You are apparently treating the 2018-2019 PARCC data as the end-all-be-all for determining how well students are performing at a given school. You apparently have no direct experience with Jefferson or with how kids there are placed in specific cohorts. Citing PARCC data that anyone can easily look up themselves adds absolutely nothing of value to the conversation.

Look, I get it that you chose not to send your kid(s) to Jefferson. That's perfectly fine. The school is not for everyone -- nor is any other school.

As long as we're going to play this game, why don't you tell us which middle school you did choose. Then those of us who have no experience with that school can tell you what's wrong with it.

This is the problem with Jefferson boosters. Talking about the size of various cohorts at the school is not an attack on you or your choices.

Please. I'm not buying your “aw shucks, I’m just discussing the size of cohorts” routine. You’re going far beyond that. You’re asserting that it’s a “no brainer” for anyone who cares about this issue to not choose Jefferson. As if those of us who send our kids there simply don’t care. That is an attack, whether you intend it to be or not.

In any event, you have no personal experience with the school or with how students there are placed in cohorts for their math, ELA, science and social studies classes. You therefore don't have anything of significant value to add to the discussion. Yet here you are. Again and again.

You’re definitely responding to more than one poster. Also at least one person in this thread said that they didn’t know about the large disparity in the relative sizes of the very low performing cohorts, so I don’t know where you get off saying that poster added no value. You made one very informative post and then just post defensively over and over attacking posters. I’m not sure why that’s helpful to OP.

[Anonymous]

Also, no one in this thread has said anything at all about how people are placed into classes, so it’s not clear why you keep repeating that they have no personal experience with that over and over? Perhaps that’s why they didn’t mention it?

[Anonymous]

I don't agree. The ed picture just isn't as black and white as you paint it.

City demographics continue to shift, and gentrification remains a powerful force for change. Mayor Bowser won't be in office forever.

The ed landscape you describe may have been accurate a decade back, but I'm not convinced that that DCPS and the city council members no longer give a whit about keeping high SES families in traditional public schools after elementary school. If high SES retention in DCPS middle and high schools was irrelevant politically, DCPS wouldn't be planning to open a 2nd high school in Ward 3 within the next few years, mainly to relieve crowding at Wilson.

Once the new HS opens, some CH families will join Hardy families there, via the OOB lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree. The ed picture just isn't as black and white as you paint it.

City demographics continue to shift, and gentrification remains a powerful force for change. Mayor Bowser won't be in office forever.

The ed landscape you describe may have been accurate a decade back, but I'm not convinced that that DCPS and the city council members no longer give a whit about keeping high SES families in traditional public schools after elementary school. If high SES retention in DCPS middle and high schools was irrelevant politically, DCPS wouldn't be planning to open a 2nd high school in Ward 3 within the next few years, mainly to relieve crowding at Wilson.

Once the new HS opens, some CH families will join Hardy families there, via the OOB lottery.

No DCPS doesn’t care. They have taken honors classes away at Wilson with honors for all and more families from Deal are opting out of Wilson. They have done away with any testing for Walls and United the academic entrance and the admission process is opaque with the city saying they want more kids from other low SES wards other than 3.

The new HS will relieve some crowding at Wilson but don’t expect too much. My money is the primary motive is to draw OOB at risk kids to better schools and I bet anything there is going to be a set aside at risk preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is it worth changing from a jefferson feeder to a hobson feeder? distance is about the same.

I'm sure you will hear from Jefferson boosters on here... but if you care about the size of the cohort of high performing kids & the size of the cohort of truly low performing kids, SH is a no brainer. ELA is where the huge difference is and that's the skill that's more transferable to the non-tracked classes like science & social studies. SH has 6% of kids getting 1s on PARCC... Jefferson has 26%. So, in one setting, your kid's class might have 1 or 2 kids *way* below grade level (illiterate or close to it, if we're being honest); in the other, it's fully 1/4th of the class. On the flip side, SH has over 50% of kids at grade level for ELA, so even the non-tracked classes are majority kids who have the tools to do the work; at Jefferson, it's just over 1/3.

A few responses to this:

* You are judging the two schools based solely on 2018-19 PARCC data and no other factors. I would suggest that there is far more to consider when weighing school options, particularly since none of that test data reflects the performance or aptitude of any of the kids who currently attend either school.

* While you are correct that the 2018-2019 data showed a significant difference in ELA proficiency (56% at Stuart-Hobson versus 37% at Jefferson), you did not mention that the math proficiency of the two schools was very similar that year (23% and 21%, respectively).

* The percentage of Jefferson students receiving a 1 in ELA in 2018-2019 was actually 23%, not 26%. I realize that it's a small difference -- and that it wasn't a good number in any case. But if you're going to rely solely on 2018-2019 PARCC data to judge the schools, at least be accurate, particularly if you're going to use phrases like "fully 1/4th."

* I would argue that math is more transferable to science than is ELA. And if f you're going to classify kids as "illiterate" for receiving a 1 on ELA, then how do you classify those who received a 1 in math in 2018-2019 (17% at Stuart-Hobson and 23% at Jefferson)?

* It bears repeating that all of these numbers are from 2018-2019 and do not in any way reflect the performance or aptitude of any of the current students at Jefferson or Stuart-Hobson.

* In the latest U.S. and World Report rankings, Jefferson is the considered third best standalone DCSP middle school, behind only Deal and Hardy. Stuart-Hobson is fourth in that category. Point being, those of us in Ward 6 have relatively good options for middle schools, despite all of the complaining of some on here.

* Regardless of which school may be "better," I don't think it's worth uprooting a kid from his or her current elementary school just for a change in the feeder pattern. For the past couple of years, Stuart-Hobson has been relatively easy to get into through the lottery. For 2021-2022, it made 91 waitlist offers for sixth grade. The year before that it made 135. (Some of the current students at Jefferson received waitlist offers for Stuart-Hobson but remained with Jefferson, while some kids who had been Jefferson-bound switched to Stuart-Hobson. Each family had its own reasons for its decision.)

Jefferson booster is here! I said if you care about the size of the high performing cohort and low performing cohort; some may not and have other things they value more. I specifically said ELA is where the huge difference is, so I’m not sure where you get that I didn’t acknowledge I was talking about ELA specifically. Math has very little transference to the BS middle school science class both schools are doing. This isn’t BASIS real physics. It’s like Earth Science at most. There’s a reason that ESes drill reading even to the detriment of math. Innumeracy doesn’t make you unable to read your science textbook… you know what does? (You’re right about 23 v 26; my apologies.)

You said that "if you care" about these factors, then it's a "no brainer." You are apparently disregarding everyone who does, in fact, care about these factors but who also takes into account other factors in considering schools. It's not as simple as "caring" or "not."

Apologies accepted.

Yeah, sorry. If you care at all about the size of the cohorts, I think it’s a no brainer. No apologies from me. Jefferson has too many really low performing kids and not enough high performing ones. No apologies for that reality.

You are apparently treating the 2018-2019 PARCC data as the end-all-be-all for determining how well students are performing at a given school. You apparently have no direct experience with Jefferson or with how kids there are placed in specific cohorts. Citing PARCC data that anyone can easily look up themselves adds absolutely nothing of value to the conversation.

Look, I get it that you chose not to send your kid(s) to Jefferson. That's perfectly fine. The school is not for everyone -- nor is any other school.

As long as we're going to play this game, why don't you tell us which middle school you did choose. Then those of us who have no experience with that school can tell you what's wrong with it.

This is the problem with Jefferson boosters. Talking about the size of various cohorts at the school is not an attack on you or your choices.

Please. I'm not buying your “aw shucks, I’m just discussing the size of cohorts” routine. You’re going far beyond that. You’re asserting that it’s a “no brainer” for anyone who cares about this issue to not choose Jefferson. As if those of us who send our kids there simply don’t care. That is an attack, whether you intend it to be or not.

In any event, you have no personal experience with the school or with how students there are placed in cohorts for their math, ELA, science and social studies classes. You therefore don't have anything of significant value to add to the discussion. Yet here you are. Again and again.

You’re definitely responding to more than one poster. Also at least one person in this thread said that they didn’t know about the large disparity in the relative sizes of the very low performing cohorts, so I don’t know where you get off saying that poster added no value. You made one very informative post and then just post defensively over and over attacking posters. I’m not sure why that’s helpful to OP.

Gee — I’m sorry. I guess I’m having trouble distinguishing among the apparently multiple people who are belittling me as a “booster.” But of course that’s not meant as an attack either, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish that UMC CH families had boycotted all 3 mediocre or bad DCPS middle schools as a protest vote long ago. They could have joined forces to hold out for one good Deal type option. With a few high SES families using these schools, DCPS is in a good position to call more than 80% of us elitist/racist, leaving things at that.

DCPS would never allow one good Deal type option for Capitol Hill. Can't have nice things in DC!

[Anonymous]

It’s a pipe dream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree. The ed picture just isn't as black and white as you paint it.

City demographics continue to shift, and gentrification remains a powerful force for change. Mayor Bowser won't be in office forever.

The ed landscape you describe may have been accurate a decade back, but I'm not convinced that that DCPS and the city council members no longer give a whit about keeping high SES families in traditional public schools after elementary school. If high SES retention in DCPS middle and high schools was irrelevant politically, DCPS wouldn't be planning to open a 2nd high school in Ward 3 within the next few years, mainly to relieve crowding at Wilson.

Once the new HS opens, some CH families will join Hardy families there, via the OOB lottery.

No DCPS doesn’t care. They have taken honors classes away at Wilson with honors for all and more families from Deal are opting out of Wilson. They have done away with any testing for Walls and United the academic entrance and the admission process is opaque with the city saying they want more kids from other low SES wards other than 3.

The new HS will relieve some crowding at Wilson but don’t expect too much. My money is the primary motive is to draw OOB at risk kids to better schools and I bet anything there is going to be a set aside at risk preference.

. Honors for All st Wilson has been rolled back somewhat this school year. Just not true that many in-boundary families have been abandoning Deal and Wilson. If it were, in-boundary numbers wouldn’t have risen during the pandemic. Private schools cost a bomb and, with college, housing and fuel costs rising, even moderately wealthy families are feeling the squeeze. I’m willing to believe that DCPS doesn’t prioritize high SES\white retention, particularly EotP, but not that they could care less about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree. The ed picture just isn't as black and white as you paint it.

City demographics continue to shift, and gentrification remains a powerful force for change. Mayor Bowser won't be in office forever.

The ed landscape you describe may have been accurate a decade back, but I'm not convinced that that DCPS and the city council members no longer give a whit about keeping high SES families in traditional public schools after elementary school. If high SES retention in DCPS middle and high schools was irrelevant politically, DCPS wouldn't be planning to open a 2nd high school in Ward 3 within the next few years, mainly to relieve crowding at Wilson.

Once the new HS opens, some CH families will join Hardy families there, via the OOB lottery.

No DCPS doesn’t care. They have taken honors classes away at Wilson with honors for all and more families from Deal are opting out of Wilson. They have done away with any testing for Walls and United the academic entrance and the admission process is opaque with the city saying they want more kids from other low SES wards other than 3.

The new HS will relieve some crowding at Wilson but don’t expect too much. My money is the primary motive is to draw OOB at risk kids to better schools and I bet anything there is going to be a set aside at risk preference.

. Honors for All st Wilson has been rolled back somewhat this school year. Just not true that many in-boundary families have been abandoning Deal and Wilson. If it were, in-boundary numbers wouldn’t have risen during the pandemic. Private schools cost a bomb and, with college, housing and fuel costs rising, even moderately wealthy families are feeling the squeeze. I’m willing to believe that DCPS doesn’t prioritize high SES\white retention, particularly EotP, but not that they could care less about it.

Not trying to be a jerk, but what evidence do you have? I really can’t think of any indication DCPS thinks inboundary retention at SH in particular is a concern. (To be clear, I’m ambivalent about it myself. It would be less stressful for parents if they got what they want from their in bound school, but most middle school parents I know are making it work in various ways (including their inbound school).

[Anonymous]

SH is the only DCPS MS I know of offering tracked ELA classes. Many if not most of the students in these classes are IB. The classes were created a decade back to help retain IB families after 5th grade at SH was pushed down to Watkins.