Boundary study question

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. New question for you guys, who all seem very helpful and apparently live near me: Could we (the Ward 2 parent community) agitate for Shaw/Euclid MS to have an IB program?

I love Thomson's! The reason we have the option to go to Jefferson is apparently so we can continue it, but it never materialized there, or did and then went away.

At Thomson, all kids get IB prep. I'm not sure if it's the same way at the middle school level or not...I think it is, at least in some subjects?

A lot of Thomson kids end up at Banneker which also has IB, but right now the only middle school option in the city (I think) is at Deal, which would be an insane commute if we somehow lotteried in. I love the deeper thinking and rigor of IB and would love for my kid to continue it after ES.

Would be way more enthused about Shaw/Euclid Middle if it was offered there. I bet the Garrison/Seaton parents would like it too.

Sorry I realize I'm now getting off my own topic and that the new middle won't open for a long time.

Thanks again for your responses DCUM! Super helpful and reassuring!

Eliot Hine middle school and Eastern High school both have IB/IB middle years. That is interesting. Your elementary school has IB early years, so far I don't think any of Eastern's feeder schools have that. I am the PP who is on the boundary committee, and this is one of the things we are talking about, how to balance program options across the city. I think it makes sense to have a middle school and high school to have IB programs in multiple parts of the city, so parents don't have to travel far if they choose that option.

OP here. I didn't know Eliot-Hine had IB! That's good to hear, though it is a bit far for Thomson families, even for us in the Walker-Jones district. (We live very close to W-J, wish it was a better school). I'm not sure how hard it E-S to lottery into, seems to be getting more popular. Would you ever consider a preference for kids coming from IB elementaries to go to middles with IB?

I personally think the IB for all approach works at Thomson, that's how it's designed at the elementary level. By high school, I understand every kid may not be a fit for it. I confess I don't know much how it works at middle schools, whether it's for everyone, some kids, or a hybrid. But either way, I'd love to see it at Shaw/Euclid if that's where Thomson is redistricted to. In fact, I'd love to see it at SWW@FS, which we are already districted for. Pretty sure they use pre-AP which I don't think is as strong, even though regular AP is great.

Again, thanks for engaging with us! Would love your help in ensuring Thomson thrives despite lower enrollment during this period of uncertainty for the downtown area. Thanks again for letting me know it's unlikely to close! Please come back to this thread and update if that somehow changes.

The problem is, OP, "IB for all" but without holding kids to the workload and performance and participation standards, means that it's not really IB anymore. At the elementary level, which is more teacher-driven, it's manageable if the teacher is good at in-class differentiation. But at the middle school level, with some kids several years above grade and some kids several years behind, it's much harder for a teacher to do. It's only really possible with two teachers in the classroom at the same time, one focused on special needs. DCPS likes to say things like "IB for all" but they're not willing to back it up with funding and staffing. Middle school-age parents know this, and that's why DCPS middle schools are so unpopular. Until DCPS is willing to spend the money and do the quality control, and stop blowing smoke at parents with happy talk and buzz words, nothing changes.

[Anonymous]

It feels like these "town halls" are just you looking at parents talking until your eyes glaze over, and then doing whatever you want to do regardless. There's no point in engagement, it's fake.

You guys say all these buzzwords and consultant-speak that people don't even really understand, tiptoe around the real issues and use euphemisms for everything, refuse to discuss anything candidly, and most frustrating of all, expect us to believe what you say. But we parents have been lied to by DCPS for so long, we just can't do it anymore. Either you deliver *actually* advanced coursework, or we stick with Latin and BASIS. It's as simple as that.

Didn't the mayor say, once upon a time, "Alice Deal for All"? What do you think she meant by that? Was she just lying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. New question for you guys, who all seem very helpful and apparently live near me: Could we (the Ward 2 parent community) agitate for Shaw/Euclid MS to have an IB program?

I love Thomson's! The reason we have the option to go to Jefferson is apparently so we can continue it, but it never materialized there, or did and then went away.

At Thomson, all kids get IB prep. I'm not sure if it's the same way at the middle school level or not...I think it is, at least in some subjects?

A lot of Thomson kids end up at Banneker which also has IB, but right now the only middle school option in the city (I think) is at Deal, which would be an insane commute if we somehow lotteried in. I love the deeper thinking and rigor of IB and would love for my kid to continue it after ES.

Would be way more enthused about Shaw/Euclid Middle if it was offered there. I bet the Garrison/Seaton parents would like it too.

Sorry I realize I'm now getting off my own topic and that the new middle won't open for a long time.

Thanks again for your responses DCUM! Super helpful and reassuring!

Eliot Hine middle school and Eastern High school both have IB/IB middle years. That is interesting. Your elementary school has IB early years, so far I don't think any of Eastern's feeder schools have that. I am the PP who is on the boundary committee, and this is one of the things we are talking about, how to balance program options across the city. I think it makes sense to have a middle school and high school to have IB programs in multiple parts of the city, so parents don't have to travel far if they choose that option.

OP here. I didn't know Eliot-Hine had IB! That's good to hear, though it is a bit far for Thomson families, even for us in the Walker-Jones district. (We live very close to W-J, wish it was a better school). I'm not sure how hard it E-S to lottery into, seems to be getting more popular. Would you ever consider a preference for kids coming from IB elementaries to go to middles with IB?

I personally think the IB for all approach works at Thomson, that's how it's designed at the elementary level. By high school, I understand every kid may not be a fit for it. I confess I don't know much how it works at middle schools, whether it's for everyone, some kids, or a hybrid. But either way, I'd love to see it at Shaw/Euclid if that's where Thomson is redistricted to. In fact, I'd love to see it at SWW@FS, which we are already districted for. Pretty sure they use pre-AP which I don't think is as strong, even though regular AP is great.

Again, thanks for engaging with us! Would love your help in ensuring Thomson thrives despite lower enrollment during this period of uncertainty for the downtown area. Thanks again for letting me know it's unlikely to close! Please come back to this thread and update if that somehow changes.

Thanks other Boundary Committee member for posting links to the townhalls, I logged back on to do just that. None of us know what the outcome of the process will be, and in the end we submit our recommendations to the Mayor so it is not our final call. I will say, as somebody who has been to a million various community, school, ward, and city meetings over the years, I do relate to the feeling that some meetings are more an exercise they have to do, and they don't actually listen to input. However, the folks from DME and the various consultants working on this do seem engaged and responsive to feedback and ideas, both from the committee members, as well as from the townhalls, and from folks who filled out their surveys. They are also trying to attend more community events to hear from people directly - other groups have written letters etc. One advantage to more folks logging onto the town halls is so the participation isn't skewed towards one topic/school/part of the city.
On the topic of advanced classes, I do know that math is the district wide focus this year, and more info will be on this link soon https://dcpsstrong.com/strategic-plan/ . Either way - griping about the problem on here is not going to change anything, engaging with people trying to listen may make a difference, so I do encourage folks to log onto those sessions, or find another way to engage with their Ward Education group, council member, etc.

Ok, having read this "strategic plan", I say once again, it's so choked with consultant-babble and euphemisms that it barely has any real meaning or content at all. And what has been censored out of it is the desire for academic classes that are genuinely, truly on or above grade level. Is nobody allowed to talk about this?

There's no "plan" in this "strategic plan". There's zero specific information about what's going to happen. This is exactly what I mean when I say engagement with DCPS is pointless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. New question for you guys, who all seem very helpful and apparently live near me: Could we (the Ward 2 parent community) agitate for Shaw/Euclid MS to have an IB program?

I love Thomson's! The reason we have the option to go to Jefferson is apparently so we can continue it, but it never materialized there, or did and then went away.

At Thomson, all kids get IB prep. I'm not sure if it's the same way at the middle school level or not...I think it is, at least in some subjects?

A lot of Thomson kids end up at Banneker which also has IB, but right now the only middle school option in the city (I think) is at Deal, which would be an insane commute if we somehow lotteried in. I love the deeper thinking and rigor of IB and would love for my kid to continue it after ES.

Would be way more enthused about Shaw/Euclid Middle if it was offered there. I bet the Garrison/Seaton parents would like it too.

Sorry I realize I'm now getting off my own topic and that the new middle won't open for a long time.

Thanks again for your responses DCUM! Super helpful and reassuring!

Eliot Hine middle school and Eastern High school both have IB/IB middle years. That is interesting. Your elementary school has IB early years, so far I don't think any of Eastern's feeder schools have that. I am the PP who is on the boundary committee, and this is one of the things we are talking about, how to balance program options across the city. I think it makes sense to have a middle school and high school to have IB programs in multiple parts of the city, so parents don't have to travel far if they choose that option.

OP here. I didn't know Eliot-Hine had IB! That's good to hear, though it is a bit far for Thomson families, even for us in the Walker-Jones district. (We live very close to W-J, wish it was a better school). I'm not sure how hard it E-S to lottery into, seems to be getting more popular. Would you ever consider a preference for kids coming from IB elementaries to go to middles with IB?

I personally think the IB for all approach works at Thomson, that's how it's designed at the elementary level. By high school, I understand every kid may not be a fit for it. I confess I don't know much how it works at middle schools, whether it's for everyone, some kids, or a hybrid. But either way, I'd love to see it at Shaw/Euclid if that's where Thomson is redistricted to. In fact, I'd love to see it at SWW@FS, which we are already districted for. Pretty sure they use pre-AP which I don't think is as strong, even though regular AP is great.

Again, thanks for engaging with us! Would love your help in ensuring Thomson thrives despite lower enrollment during this period of uncertainty for the downtown area. Thanks again for letting me know it's unlikely to close! Please come back to this thread and update if that somehow changes.

The problem is, OP, "IB for all" but without holding kids to the workload and performance and participation standards, means that it's not really IB anymore. At the elementary level, which is more teacher-driven, it's manageable if the teacher is good at in-class differentiation. But at the middle school level, with some kids several years above grade and some kids several years behind, it's much harder for a teacher to do. It's only really possible with two teachers in the classroom at the same time, one focused on special needs. DCPS likes to say things like "IB for all" but they're not willing to back it up with funding and staffing. Middle school-age parents know this, and that's why DCPS middle schools are so unpopular. Until DCPS is willing to spend the money and do the quality control, and stop blowing smoke at parents with happy talk and buzz words, nothing changes.

OP here. Gotcha - yeah, I don't know much about how IB works in middle schools. And I've heard other parents express similar frustration, even some of my friends in the burbs. I've also read articles about how GT classes end up being all white little islands in diverse schools. It seems like a super complicated issue and I honestly don't know where I stand and haven't been forced to figure it out because my kid is in elementary still.

Just to be clear though, IB (as in the national non-profit org running the program) is IB for all at the elementary level everywhere, not just in DC. That's how it is designed. I only know because my kid is at Thomson, otherwise I wouldn't have realized that! I thought at first my kid would have to test in! It's a great framework for learning and requires certain things (like foreign language and a particular teaching style) at the school. It does call for lots of differentiation, like you said. Really seems to work at Thomson which has a very diverse student body, both racially and economically. I think teaching this way is probably harder so the school has to be really committed to it.

Would love to see more an IB option at the middle school level for Thomson kids, boundary study folks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. New question for you guys, who all seem very helpful and apparently live near me: Could we (the Ward 2 parent community) agitate for Shaw/Euclid MS to have an IB program?

I love Thomson's! The reason we have the option to go to Jefferson is apparently so we can continue it, but it never materialized there, or did and then went away.

At Thomson, all kids get IB prep. I'm not sure if it's the same way at the middle school level or not...I think it is, at least in some subjects?

A lot of Thomson kids end up at Banneker which also has IB, but right now the only middle school option in the city (I think) is at Deal, which would be an insane commute if we somehow lotteried in. I love the deeper thinking and rigor of IB and would love for my kid to continue it after ES.

Would be way more enthused about Shaw/Euclid Middle if it was offered there. I bet the Garrison/Seaton parents would like it too.

Sorry I realize I'm now getting off my own topic and that the new middle won't open for a long time.

Thanks again for your responses DCUM! Super helpful and reassuring!

Eliot Hine middle school and Eastern High school both have IB/IB middle years. That is interesting. Your elementary school has IB early years, so far I don't think any of Eastern's feeder schools have that. I am the PP who is on the boundary committee, and this is one of the things we are talking about, how to balance program options across the city. I think it makes sense to have a middle school and high school to have IB programs in multiple parts of the city, so parents don't have to travel far if they choose that option.

OP here. I didn't know Eliot-Hine had IB! That's good to hear, though it is a bit far for Thomson families, even for us in the Walker-Jones district. (We live very close to W-J, wish it was a better school). I'm not sure how hard it E-S to lottery into, seems to be getting more popular. Would you ever consider a preference for kids coming from IB elementaries to go to middles with IB?

I personally think the IB for all approach works at Thomson, that's how it's designed at the elementary level. By high school, I understand every kid may not be a fit for it. I confess I don't know much how it works at middle schools, whether it's for everyone, some kids, or a hybrid. But either way, I'd love to see it at Shaw/Euclid if that's where Thomson is redistricted to. In fact, I'd love to see it at SWW@FS, which we are already districted for. Pretty sure they use pre-AP which I don't think is as strong, even though regular AP is great.

Again, thanks for engaging with us! Would love your help in ensuring Thomson thrives despite lower enrollment during this period of uncertainty for the downtown area. Thanks again for letting me know it's unlikely to close! Please come back to this thread and update if that somehow changes.

The problem is, OP, "IB for all" but without holding kids to the workload and performance and participation standards, means that it's not really IB anymore. At the elementary level, which is more teacher-driven, it's manageable if the teacher is good at in-class differentiation. But at the middle school level, with some kids several years above grade and some kids several years behind, it's much harder for a teacher to do. It's only really possible with two teachers in the classroom at the same time, one focused on special needs. DCPS likes to say things like "IB for all" but they're not willing to back it up with funding and staffing. Middle school-age parents know this, and that's why DCPS middle schools are so unpopular. Until DCPS is willing to spend the money and do the quality control, and stop blowing smoke at parents with happy talk and buzz words, nothing changes.

OP here. Gotcha - yeah, I don't know much about how IB works in middle schools. And I've heard other parents express similar frustration, even some of my friends in the burbs. I've also read articles about how GT classes end up being all white little islands in diverse schools. It seems like a super complicated issue and I honestly don't know where I stand and haven't been forced to figure it out because my kid is in elementary still.

Just to be clear though, IB (as in the national non-profit org running the program) is IB for all at the elementary level everywhere, not just in DC. That's how it is designed. I only know because my kid is at Thomson, otherwise I wouldn't have realized that! I thought at first my kid would have to test in! It's a great framework for learning and requires certain things (like foreign language and a particular teaching style) at the school. It does call for lots of differentiation, like you said. Really seems to work at Thomson which has a very diverse student body, both racially and economically. I think teaching this way is probably harder so the school has to be really committed to it.

Would love to see more an IB option at the middle school level for Thomson kids, boundary study folks!

OP, hon, you're not quite getting it. See, they're willing to give you classes that have the letters "IB" in the name. And they're willing to let your kids take IB exams. But if you're thinking that "IB" means coursework on or above grade level, and that you're going to get that in a DCPS middle school that calls its programming "IB", think again. You can't believe what DCPS says about this. At many middle schools, there aren't *any* classes that are *actually* above grade level, even if the school insists that they are. And chasing after these outside name-brand programs is a distraction from the core problem, that the instruction is not on grade level and not as advertised to parents.

[Anonymous]

As an example, OP, check out Eliot-Hine's test scores. You will see that there is literally almost nobody testing a 4 or 5 on any math PARCC test. 41% scored a 1 on the test that they took. Will you still feel like the school is "IB" when the results are this poor, even if they claim that it is? Or will you say that "IB" or no "IB", this isn't what you want?

https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/35

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an example, OP, check out Eliot-Hine's test scores. You will see that there is literally almost nobody testing a 4 or 5 on any math PARCC test. 41% scored a 1 on the test that they took. Will you still feel like the school is "IB" when the results are this poor, even if they claim that it is? Or will you say that "IB" or no "IB", this isn't what you want?

https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/35

If we are going to reference standardized test scores (which I would argue are far from the ideal metric to measure school success), the huge elephant in the room is the achievement gap between subgroups in DC Public Schools. Which yes shows that there are kids of varying abilities in the schools, but it also shows that even in different schools, there are kids who are successful on these tests and those that are not. There is a super long thread about PARCC data that was released last week (the myschool link above is from a year ago, so a little outdated). If you sort data by subgroup, a lot of kids perform similarly at the 'good' and 'not good' schools. The one silver lining of the obsession with PARCC and all of the time it takes away from regular instruction is that it sheds a light on these huge disparities. The solution about how to effectively teach ALL students in a school is a much more complex conversation. I won't copy and paste the conversation from the other PARCC thread, but if people are interested in digging into the data by subgroup, this dashboard is a bit more interactive and useful than the PARCC data spreadsheet initially released - and as they discussed on the other thread, performance across schools is a lot more nuanced once you dig beneath the surface. https://www.empowerk12.org/data-dashboard-source/dc-parcc-dash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an example, OP, check out Eliot-Hine's test scores. You will see that there is literally almost nobody testing a 4 or 5 on any math PARCC test. 41% scored a 1 on the test that they took. Will you still feel like the school is "IB" when the results are this poor, even if they claim that it is? Or will you say that "IB" or no "IB", this isn't what you want?

https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/35

If we are going to reference standardized test scores (which I would argue are far from the ideal metric to measure school success), the huge elephant in the room is the achievement gap between subgroups in DC Public Schools. Which yes shows that there are kids of varying abilities in the schools, but it also shows that even in different schools, there are kids who are successful on these tests and those that are not. There is a super long thread about PARCC data that was released last week (the myschool link above is from a year ago, so a little outdated). If you sort data by subgroup, a lot of kids perform similarly at the 'good' and 'not good' schools. The one silver lining of the obsession with PARCC and all of the time it takes away from regular instruction is that it sheds a light on these huge disparities. The solution about how to effectively teach ALL students in a school is a much more complex conversation. I won't copy and paste the conversation from the other PARCC thread, but if people are interested in digging into the data by subgroup, this dashboard is a bit more interactive and useful than the PARCC data spreadsheet initially released - and as they discussed on the other thread, performance across schools is a lot more nuanced once you dig beneath the surface. https://www.empowerk12.org/data-dashboard-source/dc-parcc-dash.

You're missing the point though. I'm no fan of the PARCC test, for sure. I definitely do appreciate the issues here and the complexity of interpreting the data. But Eliot-Hine had so few kids scoring on grade level on the math PARCC. They actually did a little better this year, so maybe the question is moot as to Eliot-Hine specifically.

But the point is, calling a school "IB" and putting the letters I and B in front of the course names isn't going to make a difference if the kids still fail to master the content! How many people are out there thinking "I'd love to go to a school that calls itself IB, and I'm sure I'd be happy there even if they can't get even 10 kids to score on grade level in math?" Nobody! Because getting 10 kids to get a 4 on the PARCC-- which btw is 3 percent of the student body there-- is a really, really low bar. 10 kids total schoolwide, they couldn't do it.

Eliot-Hine was 10% white last school year by the way. But most of those kids didn't get a 4 or 5 on the PARCC either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an example, OP, check out Eliot-Hine's test scores. You will see that there is literally almost nobody testing a 4 or 5 on any math PARCC test. 41% scored a 1 on the test that they took. Will you still feel like the school is "IB" when the results are this poor, even if they claim that it is? Or will you say that "IB" or no "IB", this isn't what you want?

https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/35

If we are going to reference standardized test scores (which I would argue are far from the ideal metric to measure school success), the huge elephant in the room is the achievement gap between subgroups in DC Public Schools. Which yes shows that there are kids of varying abilities in the schools, but it also shows that even in different schools, there are kids who are successful on these tests and those that are not. There is a super long thread about PARCC data that was released last week (the myschool link above is from a year ago, so a little outdated). If you sort data by subgroup, a lot of kids perform similarly at the 'good' and 'not good' schools. The one silver lining of the obsession with PARCC and all of the time it takes away from regular instruction is that it sheds a light on these huge disparities. The solution about how to effectively teach ALL students in a school is a much more complex conversation. I won't copy and paste the conversation from the other PARCC thread, but if people are interested in digging into the data by subgroup, this dashboard is a bit more interactive and useful than the PARCC data spreadsheet initially released - and as they discussed on the other thread, performance across schools is a lot more nuanced once you dig beneath the surface. https://www.empowerk12.org/data-dashboard-source/dc-parcc-dash.

You're missing the point though. I'm no fan of the PARCC test, for sure. I definitely do appreciate the issues here and the complexity of interpreting the data. But Eliot-Hine had so few kids scoring on grade level on the math PARCC. They actually did a little better this year, so maybe the question is moot as to Eliot-Hine specifically.

But the point is, calling a school "IB" and putting the letters I and B in front of the course names isn't going to make a difference if the kids still fail to master the content! How many people are out there thinking "I'd love to go to a school that calls itself IB, and I'm sure I'd be happy there even if they can't get even 10 kids to score on grade level in math?" Nobody! Because getting 10 kids to get a 4 on the PARCC-- which btw is 3 percent of the student body there-- is a really, really low bar. 10 kids total schoolwide, they couldn't do it.

Eliot-Hine was 10% white last school year by the way. But most of those kids didn't get a 4 or 5 on the PARCC either.

OP here. I hear your frustration with the rigor, though as an elementary mom I haven't experienced it myself yet, and think there's a lot of complexities here. But your concern is definitely one I've heard friends with older kids make. I think many parents agree with your general point that equity can go along with rigor and work that's appropriate to individual kids' needs.

Again, I don't much know about IB beyond elementary, where it's more of a mindset for learning/teaching style. I would love to see my kid continue that inquiry-based/project heavy style of teaching in middle, ideally of course at a school that also has strong PARCC scores relative to demographics, which SW@FSS seems to, and which I'm hoping the new Shaw/Euclid middle will, especially if Thomson is redistricted there.

Since this thread seems to have the attention of folks on the boundary study committee, I was interested in raising the possibility of a preference for E-H for kids coming from IB elementaries like Thomson, in part because, as you rightly pointed out, that school seems to be on an upswing and may be comparable to SWW@FS or even better by the time my kid leaves elementary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an example, OP, check out Eliot-Hine's test scores. You will see that there is literally almost nobody testing a 4 or 5 on any math PARCC test. 41% scored a 1 on the test that they took. Will you still feel like the school is "IB" when the results are this poor, even if they claim that it is? Or will you say that "IB" or no "IB", this isn't what you want?

https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/35

If we are going to reference standardized test scores (which I would argue are far from the ideal metric to measure school success), the huge elephant in the room is the achievement gap between subgroups in DC Public Schools. Which yes shows that there are kids of varying abilities in the schools, but it also shows that even in different schools, there are kids who are successful on these tests and those that are not. There is a super long thread about PARCC data that was released last week (the myschool link above is from a year ago, so a little outdated). If you sort data by subgroup, a lot of kids perform similarly at the 'good' and 'not good' schools. The one silver lining of the obsession with PARCC and all of the time it takes away from regular instruction is that it sheds a light on these huge disparities. The solution about how to effectively teach ALL students in a school is a much more complex conversation. I won't copy and paste the conversation from the other PARCC thread, but if people are interested in digging into the data by subgroup, this dashboard is a bit more interactive and useful than the PARCC data spreadsheet initially released - and as they discussed on the other thread, performance across schools is a lot more nuanced once you dig beneath the surface. https://www.empowerk12.org/data-dashboard-source/dc-parcc-dash.

You're missing the point though. I'm no fan of the PARCC test, for sure. I definitely do appreciate the issues here and the complexity of interpreting the data. But Eliot-Hine had so few kids scoring on grade level on the math PARCC. They actually did a little better this year, so maybe the question is moot as to Eliot-Hine specifically.

But the point is, calling a school "IB" and putting the letters I and B in front of the course names isn't going to make a difference if the kids still fail to master the content! How many people are out there thinking "I'd love to go to a school that calls itself IB, and I'm sure I'd be happy there even if they can't get even 10 kids to score on grade level in math?" Nobody! Because getting 10 kids to get a 4 on the PARCC-- which btw is 3 percent of the student body there-- is a really, really low bar. 10 kids total schoolwide, they couldn't do it.

Eliot-Hine was 10% white last school year by the way. But most of those kids didn't get a 4 or 5 on the PARCC either.

OP here. I hear your frustration with the rigor, though as an elementary mom I haven't experienced it myself yet, and think there's a lot of complexities here. But your concern is definitely one I've heard friends with older kids make. I think many parents agree with your general point that equity can go along with rigor and work that's appropriate to individual kids' needs.

Again, I don't much know about IB beyond elementary, where it's more of a mindset for learning/teaching style. I would love to see my kid continue that inquiry-based/project heavy style of teaching in middle, ideally of course at a school that also has strong PARCC scores relative to demographics, which SW@FSS seems to, and which I'm hoping the new Shaw/Euclid middle will, especially if Thomson is redistricted there.

Since this thread seems to have the attention of folks on the boundary study committee, I was interested in raising the possibility of a preference for E-H for kids coming from IB elementaries like Thomson, in part because, as you rightly pointed out, that school seems to be on an upswing and may be comparable to SWW@FS or even better by the time my kid leaves elementary.

Thank you. But do understand, it's not just the rigor, it's the lying about the content of the classes. DCPS will put the "IB" label on things that do not in fact use the IB model. So when you're advocating for more "IB", be really careful and don't trust them.

[Anonymous]

Also really think, OP, if "IB" as implemented by DCPS is producing really, really low percentages of students testing on grade level, do you actually like IB as much as you think you do? Will you like it if your child is one of the students testing below grade level? Will you still like it if your kid's friends leave because of it?

Elementary parents love to go on about inquiry and projects and expeditionary yada yada, but at the end of the day most people want on-grade-level test results to go with it. I'm no friend of the PARCC test, but getting a few kids to pass it is not that high a bar, you know?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It feels like these "town halls" are just you looking at parents talking until your eyes glaze over, and then doing whatever you want to do regardless. There's no point in engagement, it's fake.

You guys say all these buzzwords and consultant-speak that people don't even really understand, tiptoe around the real issues and use euphemisms for everything, refuse to discuss anything candidly, and most frustrating of all, expect us to believe what you say. But we parents have been lied to by DCPS for so long, we just can't do it anymore. Either you deliver *actually* advanced coursework, or we stick with Latin and BASIS. It's as simple as that.

Didn't the mayor say, once upon a time, "Alice Deal for All"? What do you think she meant by that? Was she just lying?

I participated last time. I felt folks were engaged. I felt some parents were frighteningly intense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It feels like these "town halls" are just you looking at parents talking until your eyes glaze over, and then doing whatever you want to do regardless. There's no point in engagement, it's fake.

You guys say all these buzzwords and consultant-speak that people don't even really understand, tiptoe around the real issues and use euphemisms for everything, refuse to discuss anything candidly, and most frustrating of all, expect us to believe what you say. But we parents have been lied to by DCPS for so long, we just can't do it anymore. Either you deliver *actually* advanced coursework, or we stick with Latin and BASIS. It's as simple as that.

Didn't the mayor say, once upon a time, "Alice Deal for All"? What do you think she meant by that? Was she just lying?

I participated last time. I felt folks were engaged. I felt some parents were frighteningly intense.

Parents aren't the ones stupid enough to promise "Alice Deal for All";

[Anonymous]

For the record, 10% of kids at Eliot Hine are testing proficient in math.

https://profiles.dcps.dc.gov/Eliot-Hine+Middle+School

The My School profiles have what might charitably be called a glitch where they mark sections as “n < 10” when what they mean is “data suppressed.” If you add the students scoring 1-3 on the My School profile, you will see they do not sum to 100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the record, 10% of kids at Eliot Hine are testing proficient in math.

https://profiles.dcps.dc.gov/Eliot-Hine+Middle+School

The My School profiles have what might charitably be called a glitch where they mark sections as “n < 10” when what they mean is “data suppressed.” If you add the students scoring 1-3 on the My School profile, you will see they do not sum to 100%.

Are you saying that it's not actually less than 10 kids? So like they might have had 15 kids scoring a 4, but chose to suppress the data anyway?

Those percentages are percentages of kids who took the PARCC test. Anyone who took the MSAA, or who sat out the PARCC for whatever reason, wouldn't be included. So it's 10% of the kids who took the PARCC, which is smaller than the total reported population of 317.