Janney third grade parents--what do you think of the giant class sizes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The former principal explained to parents that part of the reason for the 4 large classes vs. 5 smaller is that in 4th and 5th grades they go to 4 core subjects and rotate throughout the day. It was easier for them to get used to being in 4 classes now rather than next year.

You can rotate with 5 classes too. Murch does.

I am sure that works well for Murch and families are free to choose that model by choosing Murch. A lot of families have chosen the Janney model and like it, who are you to say this is not a valid choice when you do not know the details?

wow, that was a very unfriendly response. The Murch poster was saying you can accomplish the same goals with 5 classes.

Do Janney parents look down on everyone? When they get to Deal do they allow their kids to be friends with kids from Murch?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The former principal explained to parents that part of the reason for the 4 large classes vs. 5 smaller is that in 4th and 5th grades they go to 4 core subjects and rotate throughout the day. It was easier for them to get used to being in 4 classes now rather than next year.

You can rotate with 5 classes too. Murch does.

I am sure that works well for Murch and families are free to choose that model by choosing Murch. A lot of families have chosen the Janney model and like it, who are you to say this is not a valid choice when you do not know the details?

I think you missed the point. If the class is too big for only 4 sections, you can do "the Janney model" with 5 sections. It's just about the logistics of the rotation. Just saying you don't have to accept classes with 32 kids in order to rotate to 4 core subjects.

Please explain how you have all the children with a teacher that specializes in each of the 4 subjects at hand with 5 classes and 5 teachers. I realize that the science and social studies is switched every 6 weeks, but there also are specialists for those that are shared between the 4th and 5th grade. It is not the end of the world to have teachers that teach two subjects, but there is a strategy to how they have hired their teachers and structured the classes. I know it can be done differently but that does not mean this way is not a valid choice that has some value to be weighed. If you disagree, I am not saying you have to choose this way. But there are trade offs to going with 5 classes.

Also, despite the fact that people make statements all the time about the benefits of small classes, it is not the settled fact that you think it is. There is research going both ways. And the Janney results in terms of student achievement from the ultra large classroom 3 years ago were actually very good.

[Anonymous]

When does the 10% enrollment set aside for so-called at risk students become effective? Will Janney effectively have to increase the school by approximately that number, thereby becoming crazy overcrowded, or alternatively shrink the Janney boundaries and decrease IB enrollment to make room for the quota kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the boundary line between Murch and Janney (currently zoned for Janney). The only reason I don't want to be rezoned to Murch is because the building sucks. once it is renovated, what's the difference? All the Murch families I know are happy there except for size, which is an issue with J, L, and M schools. Likewise, there were families rezoned from Murch to Lafayette. Other than the fact that Lafayette was farther, not much noise about being moved from M to L.

I do think it's a valid concern to be rezoned to a school that has worse test-scores. I may not care about test scores personally, but it's not crazy.

There was just an article in the NYT about a similar fight happening in Brooklyn. One neighborhood has one overcrowded elementary school (so crowded that IB kids can't even get in, under the rules in NYC). So they want to redraw the lines to zone part of the neighborhood to another school (also in the same neighborhood) but also includes a housing project and (unsurprisingly) the test scores are much worse. Parents would rather their kids attend the overcrowded school than be zoned for a failing school.

I did not read the NYT article but if the schools being referenced is in Park Slope (PS 351), I will tell you that the fight is really about SES and to a lesser extent race. Frankly the same dynamics are present in DC only worse.

except none of the schools being discussed here are "failing" by any measure. You can talk pecking order, but even Hearst can objectively be labeled a "successful" school

In fact, as has been noted on prior threads, if you look at the Hearst test score data by ethnic/racial subgroup - you see the White kids - which often but not always correlates with high SES in DC - score in the same bracket - e.g., 90s - as the "JKLM" scores. Ergo - if the whole school at Hearst were IB (i.e., if parts of Murch and Janney were rzoned to Hearst) and Hearsts' demographics suddenly looked like Janneys and Murchs' - poof - test scores would in all likelihood look similar too. interesting to think about just how quickly that could happen from a numbers perspective - i.e., Hearst was +/- 30% IB. with capacity 300 kids, i.e., 210 kids at Hearst were OOB. IB numbers are expected to be higher this year - say it's up to 35% IB - then 225 OOB. Rezoning roughly 110 kids from both Murch and Janney would be about 15% of current Janney population (700) and 18% of current Murch population (620) - would alleviate their crowding issues some and would turn Hearst into nearly 100% IB school with - most likely - test scores that look like every other Ward 3 nearly 100% IB school... I'm not necessarily advocating for that - I'm just surprised that some folks seem to be unable to anticipate that as the likely result of resetting the boundaries....

I would advocate for that, because it would strengthen a system of neighborhood schools while alleviating overcrowding in some schools while other, modernized schools have small, antiquated boundary areas and still have so much excess capacity that they have to fill that capacity by transporting kids from across the city.

but Hearst does reasonably well with it's less affluent population as well. Its success is not predicated on its whiteness or affluence.

Note the qualifier: "reasonably' well. Hearst is just not top tier, sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The former principal explained to parents that part of the reason for the 4 large classes vs. 5 smaller is that in 4th and 5th grades they go to 4 core subjects and rotate throughout the day. It was easier for them to get used to being in 4 classes now rather than next year.

You can rotate with 5 classes too. Murch does.

I am sure that works well for Murch and families are free to choose that model by choosing Murch. A lot of families have chosen the Janney model and like it, who are you to say this is not a valid choice when you do not know the details?

wow, that was a very unfriendly response. The Murch poster was saying you can accomplish the same goals with 5 classes.

Do Janney parents look down on everyone? When they get to Deal do they allow their kids to be friends with kids from Murch?

Oh, yes. I know of several Janney-Murch "alumni" friendships. In fact, a lot of the kids know each other a little bit from sports teams, etc. But there is much less overall mixing with Hearst kids.

[Anonymous]

"mixing"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hearst data is available by race from previously released DCPS data, but not in the school profiles.

OK. We'll just take your word for it then.

I was a NP, not from the original comment. This data, test scores by subgroups, was released in a spreadsheet on the DCPS website for ALL schools. This not a state secret.

[Anonymous]

Do the Murch students switch classes for each subject? ( have one teacher who specializes and teaches the same lesson 4 times rather than staying with the same class all day?) I'd be interested to know how they structure that and share it with janneys principal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on the boundary line between Murch and Janney (currently zoned for Janney). The only reason I don't want to be rezoned to Murch is because the building sucks. once it is renovated, what's the difference? All the Murch families I know are happy there except for size, which is an issue with J, L, and M schools. Likewise, there were families rezoned from Murch to Lafayette. Other than the fact that Lafayette was farther, not much noise about being moved from M to L.

I do think it's a valid concern to be rezoned to a school that has worse test-scores. I may not care about test scores personally, but it's not crazy.

There was just an article in the NYT about a similar fight happening in Brooklyn. One neighborhood has one overcrowded elementary school (so crowded that IB kids can't even get in, under the rules in NYC). So they want to redraw the lines to zone part of the neighborhood to another school (also in the same neighborhood) but also includes a housing project and (unsurprisingly) the test scores are much worse. Parents would rather their kids attend the overcrowded school than be zoned for a failing school.

I did not read the NYT article but if the schools being referenced is in Park Slope (PS 351), I will tell you that the fight is really about SES and to a lesser extent race. Frankly the same dynamics are present in DC only worse.

except none of the schools being discussed here are "failing" by any measure. You can talk pecking order, but even Hearst can objectively be labeled a "successful" school

In fact, as has been noted on prior threads, if you look at the Hearst test score data by ethnic/racial subgroup - you see the White kids - which often but not always correlates with high SES in DC - score in the same bracket - e.g., 90s - as the "JKLM" scores. Ergo - if the whole school at Hearst were IB (i.e., if parts of Murch and Janney were rzoned to Hearst) and Hearsts' demographics suddenly looked like Janneys and Murchs' - poof - test scores would in all likelihood look similar too. interesting to think about just how quickly that could happen from a numbers perspective - i.e., Hearst was +/- 30% IB. with capacity 300 kids, i.e., 210 kids at Hearst were OOB. IB numbers are expected to be higher this year - say it's up to 35% IB - then 225 OOB. Rezoning roughly 110 kids from both Murch and Janney would be about 15% of current Janney population (700) and 18% of current Murch population (620) - would alleviate their crowding issues some and would turn Hearst into nearly 100% IB school with - most likely - test scores that look like every other Ward 3 nearly 100% IB school... I'm not necessarily advocating for that - I'm just surprised that some folks seem to be unable to anticipate that as the likely result of resetting the boundaries....

I would advocate for that, because it would strengthen a system of neighborhood schools while alleviating overcrowding in some schools while other, modernized schools have small, antiquated boundary areas and still have so much excess capacity that they have to fill that capacity by transporting kids from across the city.

but Hearst does reasonably well with it's less affluent population as well. Its success is not predicated on its whiteness or affluence.

Note the qualifier: "reasonably' well. Hearst is just not top tier, sorry.

And Dear PP - how do you define "top tier?" Test scores perhaps? If so please see prior post ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do the Murch students switch classes for each subject? ( have one teacher who specializes and teaches the same lesson 4 times rather than staying with the same class all day?) I'd be interested to know how they structure that and share it with janneys principal.

Yes. The principals talk. They each know how the other structures it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Written by a mom who lives in the area that would be re-zoned for Hearst. "See, the other parents want to be moved."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Janney parents were incensed for one reason: property values.
Their own kids and their siblings were going to be grandfathered in. They were just concerned about falling property values.

Not everyone, i would love to get re-zoned - being in Mann will lead to even higher property values. Think they will move the line between Spring Valley and AU Park to Yuma - its only one block.

Folks did not by rights to J K L or M - they bought rights to D C P and S. We're about the achievement gap these days ya know.

[Anonymous]

Buy bye?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Janney parents were incensed for one reason: property values.
Their own kids and their siblings were going to be grandfathered in. They were just concerned about falling property values.

Why isn't that a legitimate concern? Access to Janney very much drives property values. Why do you think people overpay so much for tiny Side-hall Pre WW II brick "colonials"?

This is so stupid. Because AU Park homes are not valued higher per sqaure foot -- the correct measurement -- than homes IB for Murch (Forest Hills, Chevy Chase DC) or especially the Cleveland Park homes IB for Hearst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Janney parents were incensed for one reason: property values.
Their own kids and their siblings were going to be grandfathered in. They were just concerned about falling property values.

Why isn't that a legitimate concern? Access to Janney very much drives property values. Why do you think people overpay so much for tiny Side-hall Pre WW II brick "colonials"?

This is so stupid. Because AU Park homes are not valued higher per sqaure foot -- the correct measurement -- than homes IB for Murch (Forest Hills, Chevy Chase DC) or especially the Cleveland Park homes IB for Hearst.

Most of Cleveland Park is zoned for Eaton.

[Anonymous]

There is zero evidence Janney homes cost more than neighboring school zones like Murch and Hearst. It is an expensive area in general.