Middle and high school on Capitol Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: "second that it's not elitist as long as it's based on merit. It should also include sufficient resources to mitigate social barriers to entry for economically disadvantaged and students of color. Call it affirmative action or whatever but I'd have not problem with that."

That is what Walls is and that is not what we are talking about when we talk about a test-in magnet. Entrance is based on the test, period.

I am a NP who is the first to go to 4-year college in a typical way (not GI bill) and was FARM as a child. Not elite. However, the fact that everyone had to take the test to get invited to the test-in magnet meant that I the same chance as everyone else. And some of my most competitive classmates were POC of many types and backgrounds. I strongly agree with the previous poster who thinks that it is hard for people who didn't go to test-in magnets to understand how they really can be a lifeline for kids from rougher/harder/poorer backgrounds.

Quit honestly, from the kids I know on the Hill, there would only be a small percentage represented at such a school. And that would be fine by me.

We already have test-in HS options in DC! The question is about test-in middle schools. I think there's a decent argument to be made that given the unique demographics of the Hill, you might be able to create an excellent MS without having to test-in. The people arguing for the neighborhood option are actually also considering the fact that a high-performing cohort could help high-performing kids of all SES levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, Banneker's average SAT scores are slightly above the national average, in the low 500s. Banneker admins and parents routinely claim that the SAT is racist on these boards, favoring affluent white kids who can afford expensive test prep. Actually, kids can do all the free test prep they want on Khan Academy on-line (Khan has a contract with Educational Testing Services to provide free test prep for the new SAT, which was rolled out last year). Kids scoring in the low 500s just can't be reading much for pleasure, or doing well in algebra and geometry.

But still when comparing, you ought to compare Banneker's averages to nationwide AA averages or nationwide poverty averages and you will see Banneker scores quite higher than true peer comparisons. With so many smart Ivy grads in this board, I'm always surprised when people blindly assess Banneker against a non peer group. Isn't that the first thing they teach you when studying averages?

I think that every single person commenting on this thread would be incredibly disappointed if his/her child scored in the low 500s on the SAT. I know I would be. I also know that none of my peers in "advanced" classes in high school had such low scores.

Were your peers all black and majority in poverty? Imagine what a 40% white non poverty Banneker would look like.

Walls?

Right. And Banneker could look just like Walls in terms of SATs if they had the same profile, then people wouldn't have to stress out about Walls interviews as there could be two great schools to try for.

Banneker had better PARCC scores than Walls! So in that respect, it would result in a worse profile.

Banneker is an excellent school. As for HS PARCC scores, the experience at Wilson was a bit cautionary. Students largely prioritized other college preparatory work like AP exams above PARCC and the scores reflected it. Many advanced students blew off PARCC entirely. That's not a knock on Banneker (or Walls which also had high PARCC) but it could be a question of how much the school prioritized PARCC as a point of emphasis.

Banneker and Walls students did what they were asked to for PARCC (eg take the test), and they also took AP and IB exams. The only ones who blew them off are a portion of Wilson students.

Perhaps Banneker and Walls kids did more prep for AP all year long (as they were supposed to) and weren't so concerned with a couple in-class review sessions.

The WIlson kids could have asked for after school or Saturday make up prep sessions where there were conflicts. Instead they caused all sorts of drama.

So it's the Wilson kids that are "riff raff" that we should all be avoiding (kidding), yet Banneker is the only school whites avoid like the plague. Again, I will point out that the Banneker kids are the minority kids you'd actually want your kid to be around. I'll never understand why the whites in this city avoid Banneker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Glad you're happy with Washington Latin, but Boston Latin it isn't. I'm a difficult person to vilify for my snobbery, racism and elitism being brown, having been born in a housing project, and having attended an Ivy League school on a Pell Grant. But go for it if you it makes you feel better. If your kid was in a position to take advantage of excellent, unlimited free tutoring at city "exam school" test prep centers like Bostonian youth can, would they be worse off? If not, maybe think twice about championing a system actively shortchanging the city's best and brightest in the public school system. At a recent Washington Latin open house, I wasn't remotely impressed to learn that 6th graders reading at a 3rd grade level are shoved into the very same English classes as those reading at the high school level. Same for math and other subjects. My children are not instructional tools DC public schools can harness to raise standards for the poorly prepped and/or none too academic. Pass.

We have similar backgrounds and I am also unimpressed with Latin. My test in ultra academic high school saved my life. I'm happy to give you examples of real racism. Test-in magnet schools are not.

I just wish I could explain how it changed my life and that of my family as well. My sisters went to community college when they saw me go to my top school. They have careers now. God knows where they would be. If I was bored in my terrible inbounds school, I can't help but think I'd still be there.

Boston Latin pp here. I find that most of the DC parents and charter admins who are most staunchly anti test-in MS programs are whites who grew up in leafy suburbs. They aren't in favor of these programs because they don't have experience with them being lifesavers for poor minority students. They say, well, our program really doesn't have many students who are behind academically, so we don't need merit-based academic tracking. From where I sit, the experience of having been part of entire classes of nose-to the-grindstone, academically advanced students for six straight years (7th-12th grades) made all the difference in my life. It put me on a path to an Ivy League school, and a top law school. Several elementary school classmates I remember as being bright and motivated are in prison, for life, for murder. The main difference between us? They didn't spend evenings at the city exam school test prep center working with tutors in 6th grade like I did. It was too late for them - by that stage, they were already more interested in hanging out by the corner store, in watching TV, and in playing video games. DC could do much better by its brightest and most disciplined kids of all backgrounds.

I'm not totally against a test-in MS program, but this doesn't solve the problem. But there is plenty of evidence from across the country that unless well designed, gifted/test-in programs end up becoming disproportionately white. Also there are many advanced students who won't test in (like the PP who thinks her child working 2 grade levels ahead is so incredibly gifted as to be a shoe-in -- sorry, I think it takes more than that.) And we already know that there are charters that are challenging, such as BASIS and DC Prep, where you'd get the "nose to the grindstone" atmosphere you're looking for. But without improving/investing in neighborhood middle schools, there are going to be a lot of DC students who don't get that magic ticket to BASIS or the test-in program.

I'd like to see that evidence to support your claim "But there is plenty of evidence from across the country that unless well designed, gifted/test-in programs end up becoming disproportionately white."

I don't have data myself but from anecdotal things like class pictures and DCUM discussions of magnets around here, I'm expecting that it's more a case of some groups to be less represented than they are in the general population (probably AA and Latino ) and other groups filling that gap -- and Asian (South + East) probably has a higher slice of what's left versus white than they do in the general population. So I'm not ready to accept your claim at this point without more to back it up.

Looks to me like "well designed" and "disproportionately" in your statement are filled with innuendo

It is WELL known that test-in and "gifted" programs discriminate. http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/tn/2016/01/19/study-finds-racial-discrimination-in-school-gifted-programs/

Some school districts have taken steps to remedy this. Nashville is mentioned in the link above, and Broward County has taken steps as well: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/fl-broward-gifted-universal-test-20151015-story.html

I do appreciate your effort in posting these and looked over them. My read on the second one is that gains like Brouward found through more screening in the second article were similar to the other PPs suggestions about free test prep centers to try to help level access to test prep. Sounds like a good idea to me. (I don't know chalkbeat)

You sound certain enough in your belief about discrimination that it's probably not worth our time to try to have a civilized discussion about a sensitive topic like this where SES and racial demographics intersect.

[Anonymous]

Montgomery COunty commissioned a study on applications, admissions and enrollment in its magnet and choice programs.

It found that "information about gifted and talented magnet programs and other programs is 'not reaching segments of the community, namely Hispanic/Latino, Black/African American, non-English speaking, and low-income families as well as [it is] to other groups' and that 'there are significant racial and socioeconomic disparities in the enrollment and acceptance rates to academically selective programs, which suggest a need to revise the criteria.'

The study suggested MCPS changes its selection criteria for elementary and middle school magnet programs 'to focus these programs on selecting equitably from among those applicants that demonstrate a capacity to thrive in the program,' which could include non-academic criteria such as 'motivation or persistence.'"

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/Web-2016/Study-on-MCPS-Magnet-Programs-High-School-Consortia-Suggests-Changes-to-Improve-Opportunities-for-Students-From-Low-Income-Families/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery COunty commissioned a study on applications, admissions and enrollment in its magnet and choice programs.

It found that "information about gifted and talented magnet programs and other programs is 'not reaching segments of the community, namely Hispanic/Latino, Black/African American, non-English speaking, and low-income families as well as [it is] to other groups' and that 'there are significant racial and socioeconomic disparities in the enrollment and acceptance rates to academically selective programs, which suggest a need to revise the criteria.'

The study suggested MCPS changes its selection criteria for elementary and middle school magnet programs 'to focus these programs on selecting equitably from among those applicants that demonstrate a capacity to thrive in the program,' which could include non-academic criteria such as 'motivation or persistence.'"

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/Web-2016/Study-on-MCPS-Magnet-Programs-High-School-Consortia-Suggests-Changes-to-Improve-Opportunities-for-Students-From-Low-Income-Families/

Did anything become of this study?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, Banneker's average SAT scores are slightly above the national average, in the low 500s. Banneker admins and parents routinely claim that the SAT is racist on these boards, favoring affluent white kids who can afford expensive test prep. Actually, kids can do all the free test prep they want on Khan Academy on-line (Khan has a contract with Educational Testing Services to provide free test prep for the new SAT, which was rolled out last year). Kids scoring in the low 500s just can't be reading much for pleasure, or doing well in algebra and geometry.

But still when comparing, you ought to compare Banneker's averages to nationwide AA averages or nationwide poverty averages and you will see Banneker scores quite higher than true peer comparisons. With so many smart Ivy grads in this board, I'm always surprised when people blindly assess Banneker against a non peer group. Isn't that the first thing they teach you when studying averages?

I think that every single person commenting on this thread would be incredibly disappointed if his/her child scored in the low 500s on the SAT. I know I would be. I also know that none of my peers in "advanced" classes in high school had such low scores.

Were your peers all black and majority in poverty? Imagine what a 40% white non poverty Banneker would look like.

Walls?

In the early 80s when I was a DCPS student, Walls was considered an alternative school for the kids who could not handle a comprehensive school. Time and location changed the scope of the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery COunty commissioned a study on applications, admissions and enrollment in its magnet and choice programs.

It found that "information about gifted and talented magnet programs and other programs is 'not reaching segments of the community, namely Hispanic/Latino, Black/African American, non-English speaking, and low-income families as well as [it is] to other groups' and that 'there are significant racial and socioeconomic disparities in the enrollment and acceptance rates to academically selective programs, which suggest a need to revise the criteria.'

The study suggested MCPS changes its selection criteria for elementary and middle school magnet programs 'to focus these programs on selecting equitably from among those applicants that demonstrate a capacity to thrive in the program,' which could include non-academic criteria such as 'motivation or persistence.'"

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/Web-2016/Study-on-MCPS-Magnet-Programs-High-School-Consortia-Suggests-Changes-to-Improve-Opportunities-for-Students-From-Low-Income-Families/

Did anything become of this study?

They made some changes to the process of determining who is tested and may have made some changes to what is taken into account (can't recall specifics). It's a popular topic over in the Md public shcools forum. Lots of concerns about 'watering down' the program and general anxiety about the changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, Banneker's average SAT scores are slightly above the national average, in the low 500s. Banneker admins and parents routinely claim that the SAT is racist on these boards, favoring affluent white kids who can afford expensive test prep. Actually, kids can do all the free test prep they want on Khan Academy on-line (Khan has a contract with Educational Testing Services to provide free test prep for the new SAT, which was rolled out last year). Kids scoring in the low 500s just can't be reading much for pleasure, or doing well in algebra and geometry.

But still when comparing, you ought to compare Banneker's averages to nationwide AA averages or nationwide poverty averages and you will see Banneker scores quite higher than true peer comparisons. With so many smart Ivy grads in this board, I'm always surprised when people blindly assess Banneker against a non peer group. Isn't that the first thing they teach you when studying averages?

I think that every single person commenting on this thread would be incredibly disappointed if his/her child scored in the low 500s on the SAT. I know I would be. I also know that none of my peers in "advanced" classes in high school had such low scores.

Were your peers all black and majority in poverty? Imagine what a 40% white non poverty Banneker would look like.

Walls?

In the early 80s when I was a DCPS student, Walls was considered an alternative school for the kids who could not handle a comprehensive school. Time and location changed the scope of the school.

Your point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: "second that it's not elitist as long as it's based on merit. It should also include sufficient resources to mitigate social barriers to entry for economically disadvantaged and students of color. Call it affirmative action or whatever but I'd have not problem with that."

That is what Walls is and that is not what we are talking about when we talk about a test-in magnet. Entrance is based on the test, period.

Speak for yourself. Lots of families would welcome a competitive entrance MS comparable to Walls

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: "second that it's not elitist as long as it's based on merit. It should also include sufficient resources to mitigate social barriers to entry for economically disadvantaged and students of color. Call it affirmative action or whatever but I'd have not problem with that."

That is what Walls is and that is not what we are talking about when we talk about a test-in magnet. Entrance is based on the test, period.

Speak for yourself. Lots of families would welcome a competitive entrance MS comparable to Walls

The things I was referring was the need to both judge on merit AND somehow add affirmative actions, as Walls does through the interview process. I want both a MS and HS that enroll only students who can pass an exam, period. I think we are in agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: "second that it's not elitist as long as it's based on merit. It should also include sufficient resources to mitigate social barriers to entry for economically disadvantaged and students of color. Call it affirmative action or whatever but I'd have not problem with that."

That is what Walls is and that is not what we are talking about when we talk about a test-in magnet. Entrance is based on the test, period.

Speak for yourself. Lots of families would welcome a competitive entrance MS comparable to Walls

The things I was referring was the need to both judge on merit AND somehow add affirmative actions, as Walls does through the interview process. I want both a MS and HS that enroll only students who can pass an exam, period. I think we are in agreement.

Everyone that gets to Walls round 2, passes the test, then you hear about test bring too hard. Yet plenty of students (black and white) don't pass the test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: "second that it's not elitist as long as it's based on merit. It should also include sufficient resources to mitigate social barriers to entry for economically disadvantaged and students of color. Call it affirmative action or whatever but I'd have not problem with that."

That is what Walls is and that is not what we are talking about when we talk about a test-in magnet. Entrance is based on the test, period.

I am a NP who is the first to go to 4-year college in a typical way (not GI bill) and was FARM as a child. Not elite. However, the fact that everyone had to take the test to get invited to the test-in magnet meant that I the same chance as everyone else. And some of my most competitive classmates were POC of many types and backgrounds. I strongly agree with the previous poster who thinks that it is hard for people who didn't go to test-in magnets to understand how they really can be a lifeline for kids from rougher/harder/poorer backgrounds.

Quit honestly, from the kids I know on the Hill, there would only be a small percentage represented at such a school. And that would be fine by me.

We already have test-in HS options in DC! The question is about test-in middle schools. I think there's a decent argument to be made that given the unique demographics of the Hill, you might be able to create an excellent MS without having to test-in. The people arguing for the neighborhood option are actually also considering the fact that a high-performing cohort could help high-performing kids of all SES levels.

Yes! Exactly this! No need for test in and then fiddling with affirmative action. Just provide an excellent comprehensive middle school. Hopefully Jefferson and EH are on the way there. Seems like it would be faster if there were only one or two middle schools on the hill rather than 3, but DCPS isn't interested in making these more neighborhood type schools. More like escape valves instead for truly bad middle schools elsewhere in the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But there is plenty of evidence from across the country that unless well designed, gifted/test-in programs end up becoming disproportionately white.

Until they become disproportionately Asian, at which point whites suddenly become really concerned about the lack of black and hispanic students.

Chicago's magnet admissions formula seems to be successful at producing diverse, high-achieving selective-admission magnet high schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But there is plenty of evidence from across the country that unless well designed, gifted/test-in programs end up becoming disproportionately white.

Until they become disproportionately Asian, at which point whites suddenly become really concerned about the lack of black and hispanic students.

Chicago's magnet admissions formula seems to be successful at producing diverse, high-achieving selective-admission magnet high schools.

+1.

This is exactly what has happened in test-in and magnets in Southern California.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But there is plenty of evidence from across the country that unless well designed, gifted/test-in programs end up becoming disproportionately white.

Until they become disproportionately Asian, at which point whites suddenly become really concerned about the lack of black and hispanic students.

Chicago's magnet admissions formula seems to be successful at producing diverse, high-achieving selective-admission magnet high schools.

Chicago's formula for high school magnet admissions is:

33% 7th grade PARCC
33% middle school GPA
33% test specific to each magnet school

Even private middle schools make sure kids are prepared for PARCC and maintaining a high GPA throughout middle school.