BASIS DC to open in 2012-2013

[Anonymous]

What is wrong with tracking?? Does anyone honestly believe that a teacher can "differentiate" enough to meet the needs of all students???

Or do you believe that a teacher should make the curricula much less demanding to only focus on struggling learners? That is inherently unfair to students who are not struggling.

I see nothing wrong with tracking in order to meet the needs of all students as long as students are given support and advanced to higher tracks when the student advances.

Sorry, hit send to soon.

Tracking and differentiation are two separate theoretical constructs. In tracking, students do not have access to "higher tracks", but in differentiated instruction, they can be placed in different groups for certain subjects and advance easily when benchmarks are reached. Groups are dynamic, tracking is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:22:37 Define many. Didn't Basis miss enrollment target by a bit? Does Latin no longer have waitlist?

I'm transferring my middle schooler from Latin to BASIS.

I think the enrollment target was pretty high for the first year of operation -- perhaps as high as 400 -- and I think they didn't miss the target by much.

Latin's wait list was over 200 last year. While I don't know how many kids are leaving Latin for BASIS, a lot more than "many" kids would have to leave Latin for the wait list to be exhausted.

I suspect that Latin and BASIS will ultimately service different market segments. BASIS will attract families seeking a very rigorous curriculum, and Latin will attract families seeking a somewhat rigorous curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of the questions you raise are legitimate. But the question about admitting students to BASIS in later grades is not simply about students wanting entry who are bright and well prepared and willing to work hard. It is about the specialized curriculum that they offer and the unique way it is organized.

For example, I believe basis begins teaching chemistry, biology and physics (?) Simultaneously beginning in middle school to preprepare over multiple years for the ap exam in those subjects in maybe 10th grade. So a student wanting to enter in 8 or 9th grade would normally not already have a grounding in chemistry or physics.

Useful information. But what would stop a family, or school, who wanted a bright and hard working kid to attend BASIS in the later grades from having their kid prepped to pass the end-of-year exams? If the MS curriculum is made public, and includes chemistry, biology and physics, couldn't a bright, focused child get the necessary grounding in these subjects with the support of adults who could help? The Stanford gifted youth on-line program offers those subjects at the middle school level, and doens't charge an arm and a leg ($500-$600 a class). My neighbors want their child to attend BASIS, and they're a chemical engineer and a biologist. Some independents let advanced MS kids take HS sciences. I wouldn't put it past groups of parents to hire science instructors (having seen this happen in my neighborhood to prep kids to take the Takoma Park MS math/science/computer magnet exam).

The $60,000 question is how open the DC charter board and BASIS would be to allowing an influx of kids who could handle the upper grades curriculum to replace those who dropped out, when selective admissions would be involved. If the city were to establish a prep program serving low-income MS kids, teaching sciences intensely over summers and weekends, some could also make the cut. Without city sponsored prep, if replacement kids were allowed, most would be from affluent families and that wouldn't pass muster politically. It sounds like the franchise will simply run a very small high school in DC, assuming it gets one, seeking to avoid controversy. That would be a shame, at least in the eyes of some, when a fair number of local kids who would thrive at the school would then be excluded. I'm not convinced that the wall against selective admissions won't crumble eventually, but it could be a long while.

Sounds like some suburbanites really want a piece of BASIS. Tell them they are welcome to move into DC at any time!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These thorny issues should be addressed in the public domain BEFORE BASIS DC OPENS. Parents should be told if the school is going to be a new breed, a charter catering as much to U middleclass families as low and moderate income. There's no whitewashing the issue in the city with the biggest black-white achievement gap. Quality of graduates in upper grades could be maintaned by replacing dropouts with area teens who could perform to the BASIS standard. But is the DC Charter Board open to supporting the city's first majority white/Asian high school? Is BASIS open to that? Public and franchise officials should answer these politically vexing questions. If the answer is no, the result on the college admissions front may still be more inspiring than at SWW, Wilson, Banneker and Latin in 6-10 years.

I can't address all of your concerns, PP. However, I can address the first: BASIS DC is going to be a new breed. BASIS is trying to accomplish something in DC that many say can't be done. If you are in a position to support the effort, I encourage you to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is my question: if basis is open to anyone in the city who is interested in an overtly academically rigorous curriculum and willing to work really hard and they end up graduating excellent students, who cares what race those students are?

Fact is, everyone has an equal chance to enter and, I feel confident, to do what it takes to stay in the school. There have been, and will continue to be, vigorous outreach to all parts of the city and excellent FREE small group tutoring already happening based on diagnostic testing, to bring all students up to speed before school starts next August.

So this comes down to WHO chooses the school and WHO does what it takes to keep up with the program, repeating classes if necessary. And there are numerous levels of support in place to make that happen. So it comes down to personal choice, in my opinion and is a great asset in our city for those who choose it.

I couldn't agree more, PP.

A school can either choose the 35 who are most likely to graduate from a pool of 100 at the outset, or it can admit all 100 and allow the 35 to choose themselves through hard work. The latter approach is more equitable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's a question: It like a lot of high achieving students at Latin leave before High School. We aren't at Latin so I don't know why. Is it because families want an even more academically rigorous high school for their child? One of the complaints about BASIS in this thread is that the attrition rate is so high. Could the students leaving Latin transfer to BASIS and succeed?

Undoubtedly, it's just that they have no reason to. Why would you leave a proven high-quality middle school for an unproven promising middle school? It's not as if Basis has any high school alternative to offer, much less a reliably desirable one.

Many are making the jump from Latin to basis already. One big reason: location!

I would guess 10 - 15 out of a class of 80.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know how many Yu Ying 4th graders are leaving for Basis?

Not many, if any. There's a high degree of interest in the development of the YY/DCI multi-lingual IB middle/high school program. But, the details of course, are very much unknown. There's an upcoming meeting for the community in late May. More information should be available afterwards. In the meantime, no, I can't imagine a realistic scenario for going to Basis. It's a nice idea, but when you've got reliable options, it isn't a good bet. Maybe if my children were 8 months old instead of 8 years old, I'd be more interested. As it stands, I need other families to supply a few years worth of guinea pigs, before I'm willing to commit my child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:22:37 Define many. Didn't Basis miss enrollment target by a bit? Does Latin no longer have waitlist?

I'm transferring my middle schooler from Latin to BASIS.

I think the enrollment target was pretty high for the first year of operation -- perhaps as high as 400 -- and I think they didn't miss the target by much.

Latin's wait list was over 200 last year. While I don't know how many kids are leaving Latin for BASIS, a lot more than "many" kids would have to leave Latin for the wait list to be exhausted.

I suspect that Latin and BASIS will ultimately service different market segments. BASIS will attract families seeking a very rigorous curriculum, and Latin will attract families seeking a somewhat rigorous curriculum.

I think as long as Martha Cutts (formerly of the Cathedral Schools) is the Head of Latin, we can expect Latin students to have some old-fashioned class. It's difficult to know what to realistically expect from Basis students. The boosters are as full of braggadocio as they are empty of knowledge of DC charter school law. It's a pity really. I want to like them, but they seem determined to be stupid.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't put it past groups of parents to hire science instructors (having seen this happen in my neighborhood to prep kids to take the Takoma Park MS math/science/computer magnet exam).

In fact, I refer to Capitol Hill families open to moving to Takoma Park if their kids are admitted to the MS math/science/computers magnet there (a kid need not have attended a Mo. Co. elementary school to apply). These are families with math gifted kids concerned about the lack of merit-based MS options in DC. A friend on the Stuyvesant admissions committee likes to say that the beauty of selective admissions programs is that they work to convince the affluent to stay in public schools in a way that open lotteries can't. When well-off parents feel confident that the low-income kids in a public school or program won't lower standards for their own children, schools and poor kids accrue the benefit in a big way. When a good many of these parents elect not to vote with their feet, poor kids gain a window to a world of opportunity through peers, often the catalyst motivating them to enter professions. You can call the affluent names for hitting the road en masse, say to hell with them when they leave (a common enough reaction in DCPS), or address their concerns and cater to them in the interests of helping poor kids. Many more affluent families would stick with Latin, Wilson and SWW, and try Banneker, for HS with greater assurance of quality control. If Basis is going to graduate a few dozen kids from its HS, the effort will be laudable, particularly if top colleges indeed admit most graduates, but not terribly significant in the grand scheme of things.

[Anonymous]

I think as long as Martha Cutts (formerly of the Cathedral Schools) is the Head of Latin, we can expect Latin students to have some old-fashioned class. It's difficult to know what to realistically expect from Basis students. The boosters are as full of braggadocio as they are empty of knowledge of DC charter school law. It's a pity really. I want to like them, but they seem determined to be stupid.

Class? Perhaps Cutts might want to speak to some of her students about "class" and behavior expectations when they are in public places. Union Station area would be a starting point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think as long as Martha Cutts (formerly of the Cathedral Schools) is the Head of Latin, we can expect Latin students to have some old-fashioned class. It's difficult to know what to realistically expect from Basis students. The boosters are as full of braggadocio as they are empty of knowledge of DC charter school law. It's a pity really. I want to like them, but they seem determined to be stupid.

Class? Perhaps Cutts might want to speak to some of her students about "class" and behavior expectations when they are in public places. Union Station area would be a starting point.

What exactly are the boosters doing, PP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What is wrong with tracking?? Does anyone honestly believe that a teacher can "differentiate" enough to meet the needs of all students???

Tracking and differentiation are two very different things.

I know that they are different That is why I am in favor of tracking as long as the students are given support and advanced when ready. I think a teacher cannot possibly differentiate enough to meet the needs of all kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What is wrong with tracking?? Does anyone honestly believe that a teacher can "differentiate" enough to meet the needs of all students???

Or do you believe that a teacher should make the curricula much less demanding to only focus on struggling learners? That is inherently unfair to students who are not struggling.

I see nothing wrong with tracking in order to meet the needs of all students as long as students are given support and advanced to higher tracks when the student advances.

Sorry, hit send to soon.

Tracking and differentiation are two separate theoretical constructs. In tracking, students do not have access to "higher tracks", but in differentiated instruction, they can be placed in different groups for certain subjects and advance easily when benchmarks are reached. Groups are dynamic, tracking is not.

Actually there is no reason that tracking could not be done the right way with support for students and that would allow them to advance when ready. I think it is impossible for a teacher to fully differentiate for all students when a classroom has students who run the gamut of struggling to advanced learners.

Therefore, I think it is better not to have students who range from struggling to advanced in the same classroom. If we keep them all together, then the teacher will be directing curricula to the lowest common denominator out of necessity. This would not meet all the needs of all students.


What do you propose the Yu Ying do since they have some struggling students? Should this school change their construct just to meet the needs of the struggling students alone???? Seems to me that this is not fair to those who are struggling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What is wrong with tracking?? Does anyone honestly believe that a teacher can "differentiate" enough to meet the needs of all students???

Or do you believe that a teacher should make the curricula much less demanding to only focus on struggling learners? That is inherently unfair to students who are not struggling.

I see nothing wrong with tracking in order to meet the needs of all students as long as students are given support and advanced to higher tracks when the student advances.

Sorry, hit send to soon.

Tracking and differentiation are two separate theoretical constructs. In tracking, students do not have access to "higher tracks", but in differentiated instruction, they can be placed in different groups for certain subjects and advance easily when benchmarks are reached. Groups are dynamic, tracking is not.

Sorry, I meant it is not fair to those who are not struggling.
Actually there is no reason that tracking could not be done the right way with support for students and that would allow them to advance when ready. I think it is impossible for a teacher to fully differentiate for all students when a classroom has students who run the gamut of struggling to advanced learners.

Therefore, I think it is better not to have students who range from struggling to advanced in the same classroom. If we keep them all together, then the teacher will be directing curricula to the lowest common denominator out of necessity. This would not meet all the needs of all students.


What do you propose the Yu Ying do since they have some struggling students? Should this school change their construct just to meet the needs of the struggling students alone???? Seems to me that this is not fair to those who are struggling.

[Anonymous]

This is about Basis, not Yu Ying!