HD Cooke

[Anonymous]

It should be noted that there was nearly a 100% teacher exodus under the prior principal. in 2008, she took pride in telling prospective parents that she had hired almost all the teachers at the school herself. Then, they started to leave as well. We lost something like 20 teachers at the beginning of 2012-2013, including most of the teachers who had pre-dated her. She drove out a beloved bilingual Kindergarten teacher with 20+ years experience at the school and real ties to neighborhood businesses who spearheaded the much-loved annual Mother's day celebration and got amazing results with her kindergartners.

The former principal had her toadies and hangers on, but she treated other teachers like dirt; actively discouraging teachers from connecting with parents, and by all accounts finding ways to retaliate against anyone offering a different point of view. She managed to drive out not one, not two, but three counselors while she was there because they dared to question her, including two bilingual counselors. And, let's not forget her total refusal to work with neighborhood organizations - just ask the local ANC, which requested numerous meetings and was rebuffed every single time.

By 2013, there was almost no one left in the building who predated her aside from the librarian, the ESL teacher, and the gym teacher. I also dispute that parents liked her style. Her idea of parental involvement was to tell parents day of that there was a school play that day - not exactly friendly to any parent who had a job to go to.

[Anonymous]

This is truly not accurate data. Check the teacher retention data on the scorecards DCPS produces. In addition individual teachers who transitioned did so for a myriad of reasons including marriage, babies, grade school, relocation and yes some because there was differences with leadership style. Again, that is not a factor she hid.

The counselor fact presented also widely inaccurate with only one of the three counselors mentioned making and informed and supported decision for prefessional growth. Include there that Cooke also retained a social worker and a psychologist.

Finally, few have acknowledge that some parents didn't like her style, she even acknowledged it from what I've heard. But ask parents to compare the two now and there are very different intrepretations.

Both the prior principal and the new principal had/has very tough jobs to do and clearly neither will be able to please everyone. Just look at all of the comments.

I like the previous posters genuine acknowledgement of the work that is to come. Someone should start a new thread surrounding solutions and planning instead of the negativity all over this thread. It's not going to get Cooke or any other school with similar challenges any further.

uote=Anonymous]It should be noted that there was nearly a 100% teacher exodus under the prior principal. in 2008, she took pride in telling prospective parents that she had hired almost all the teachers at the school herself. Then, they started to leave as well. We lost something like 20 teachers at the beginning of 2012-2013, including most of the teachers who had pre-dated her. She drove out a beloved bilingual Kindergarten teacher with 20+ years experience at the school and real ties to neighborhood businesses who spearheaded the much-loved annual Mother's day celebration and got amazing results with her kindergartners.

The former principal had her toadies and hangers on, but she treated other teachers like dirt; actively discouraging teachers from connecting with parents, and by all accounts finding ways to retaliate against anyone offering a different point of view. She managed to drive out not one, not two, but three counselors while she was there because they dared to question her, including two bilingual counselors. And, let's not forget her total refusal to work with neighborhood organizations - just ask the local ANC, which requested numerous meetings and was rebuffed every single time.

By 2013, there was almost no one left in the building who predated her aside from the librarian, the ESL teacher, and the gym teacher. I also dispute that parents liked her style. Her idea of parental involvement was to tell parents day of that there was a school play that day - not exactly friendly to any parent who had a job to go to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The new principal was probably under pressure to do things differently, but that doesn't mean that she inherited a school that was at rock bottom. Far from it, and to suggest otherwise undermines the work of the staff and students who have been members of the Cooke community for a long time. If you really dig into what's happening and ask questions instead of making up things on an random posts you will see the Cooke was full (until this year) of a dynamic committed group of teachers who are unfortunately leaving in large numbers. This is not sound for the students and I hope there is a plan.

Parents should inquire with the Principal how she plans to establish a culture where all of the students regardless of background are going to thrive and grow. This can't happen with the removal of all of the cultural programming and community feel that despite if we liked it or not was established and maintained by the previous principal. This can't happen with 3% of parents coming to a board to paint a bright picture and others airing all of the schools growth spots.







I really felt like this was worth having repeated. DIG DEEPER. The teachers that raised student achievement this year under the new principal this year are the mostly the same from last year... Dedicated...involved in the community...love the students they teach..members of the Cooke family..teachers. That are leaving in mass numbers. There are entire grade teams leaving in more than one grade. Maybe Cooke will be a Phoenix and rise from the ashes anew... Hope there's a plan.

[Anonymous]

If teachers this year were able to raise student achievement (and the test scores will show whether that is the case), then it is BECAUSE OF this principal, not despite her. The scores for years under the old principal were terrible. The teachers for whatever reason under the old principal could not produce even the most barely acceptable threshold of test scores, making Cooke the worst elementary school in Ward 1 and the only one in the wars to be among the 40 worst schools in the District. It sounds like the teachers just don't like that the new principal is requiring that they teach what the kids don't know. Some teachers I am sure are also leaving for lack of performance under IMPACT and would not have the option to stay even if they wanted to do so. Either way, it sounds like the principal is on her way to turning around the school, which so needs to be turned around. I am excited for next year and beyond.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately this year test scores won't show. New assessments with nothing to compare it too. The assessments that carried over from year to year like reading comprehension assessments were already trending positive. The new principal inherently gets a clean slate of data to base her "growth and turnaround efforts" in.

And for context...compare the demographic info for the other schools in ward one against the other schools in ward one. It's demographic makeup is actually quite and anomaly. Always has been, but that's too much of really digging. It's so much easier to tell a half story with little understanding or consideration of what the data truly tells you.

Anonymous wrote:If teachers this year were able to raise student achievement (and the test scores will show whether that is the case), then it is BECAUSE OF this principal, not despite her. The scores for years under the old principal were terrible. The teachers for whatever reason under the old principal could not produce even the most barely acceptable threshold of test scores, making Cooke the worst elementary school in Ward 1 and the only one in the wars to be among the 40 worst schools in the District. It sounds like the teachers just don't like that the new principal is requiring that they teach what the kids don't know. Some teachers I am sure are also leaving for lack of performance under IMPACT and would not have the option to stay even if they wanted to do so. Either way, it sounds like the principal is on her way to turning around the school, which so needs to be turned around. I am excited for next year and beyond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately this year test scores won't show. New assessments with nothing to compare it too. The assessments that carried over from year to year like reading comprehension assessments were already trending positive. The new principal inherently gets a clean slate of data to base her "growth and turnaround efforts" in.

And for context...compare the demographic info for the other schools in ward one against the other schools in ward one. It's demographic makeup is actually quite and anomaly. Always has been, but that's too much of really digging. It's so much easier to tell a half story with little understanding or consideration of what the data truly tells you.

Anonymous wrote:If teachers this year were able to raise student achievement (and the test scores will show whether that is the case), then it is BECAUSE OF this principal, not despite her. The scores for years under the old principal were terrible. The teachers for whatever reason under the old principal could not produce even the most barely acceptable threshold of test scores, making Cooke the worst elementary school in Ward 1 and the only one in the wars to be among the 40 worst schools in the District. It sounds like the teachers just don't like that the new principal is requiring that they teach what the kids don't know. Some teachers I am sure are also leaving for lack of performance under IMPACT and would not have the option to stay even if they wanted to do so. Either way, it sounds like the principal is on her way to turning around the school, which so needs to be turned around. I am excited for next year and beyond.

It seems like a lot of the ward 1 schools have similar demographics/income levels, in terms of having many students of color, non-English speakers, and low-income students. Tubman, Reed, Bruce-Monroe, and Cleveland, for example.

[Anonymous]

Similar yes....but a difference of 5-10% can mean as much as 30 students which is more than one whole classroom of students. May not seem like a lot but that same percentage can also skew test data. So changes in scores can been a much as a student in some schools to much more than that in others. Data can really tell a lot if you understand what your really looking at.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately this year test scores won't show. New assessments with nothing to compare it too. The assessments that carried over from year to year like reading comprehension assessments were already trending positive. The new principal inherently gets a clean slate of data to base her "growth and turnaround efforts" in.

And for context...compare the demographic info for the other schools in ward one against the other schools in ward one. It's demographic makeup is actually quite and anomaly. Always has been, but that's too much of really digging. It's so much easier to tell a half story with little understanding or consideration of what the data truly tells you.

Anonymous wrote:If teachers this year were able to raise student achievement (and the test scores will show whether that is the case), then it is BECAUSE OF this principal, not despite her. The scores for years under the old principal were terrible. The teachers for whatever reason under the old principal could not produce even the most barely acceptable threshold of test scores, making Cooke the worst elementary school in Ward 1 and the only one in the wars to be among the 40 worst schools in the District. It sounds like the teachers just don't like that the new principal is requiring that they teach what the kids don't know. Some teachers I am sure are also leaving for lack of performance under IMPACT and would not have the option to stay even if they wanted to do so. Either way, it sounds like the principal is on her way to turning around the school, which so needs to be turned around. I am excited for next year and beyond.

It seems like a lot of the ward 1 schools have similar demographics/income levels, in terms of having many students of color, non-English speakers, and low-income students. Tubman, Reed, Bruce-Monroe, and Cleveland, for example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Similar yes....but a difference of 5-10% can mean as much as 30 students which is more than one whole classroom of students. May not seem like a lot but that same percentage can also skew test data. So changes in scores can been a much as a student in some schools to much more than that in others. Data can really tell a lot if you understand what your really looking at.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately this year test scores won't show. New assessments with nothing to compare it too. The assessments that carried over from year to year like reading comprehension assessments were already trending positive. The new principal inherently gets a clean slate of data to base her "growth and turnaround efforts" in.

And for context...compare the demographic info for the other schools in ward one against the other schools in ward one. It's demographic makeup is actually quite and anomaly. Always has been, but that's too much of really digging. It's so much easier to tell a half story with little understanding or consideration of what the data truly tells you.

Anonymous wrote:If teachers this year were able to raise student achievement (and the test scores will show whether that is the case), then it is BECAUSE OF this principal, not despite her. The scores for years under the old principal were terrible. The teachers for whatever reason under the old principal could not produce even the most barely acceptable threshold of test scores, making Cooke the worst elementary school in Ward 1 and the only one in the wars to be among the 40 worst schools in the District. It sounds like the teachers just don't like that the new principal is requiring that they teach what the kids don't know. Some teachers I am sure are also leaving for lack of performance under IMPACT and would not have the option to stay even if they wanted to do so. Either way, it sounds like the principal is on her way to turning around the school, which so needs to be turned around. I am excited for next year and beyond.

It seems like a lot of the ward 1 schools have similar demographics/income levels, in terms of having many students of color, non-English speakers, and low-income students. Tubman, Reed, Bruce-Monroe, and Cleveland, for example.

Right, Tubman is a much better-off school than Cooke. Oh wait, it has three times more homeless kids and the same demographic profile, and its scores are much higher.
Really glad the new Cooke principal is shaking things up--it's a school that really needs shaking up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Similar yes....but a difference of 5-10% can mean as much as 30 students which is more than one whole classroom of students. May not seem like a lot but that same percentage can also skew test data. So changes in scores can been a much as a student in some schools to much more than that in others. Data can really tell a lot if you understand what your really looking at.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately this year test scores won't show. New assessments with nothing to compare it too. The assessments that carried over from year to year like reading comprehension assessments were already trending positive. The new principal inherently gets a clean slate of data to base her "growth and turnaround efforts" in.

And for context...compare the demographic info for the other schools in ward one against the other schools in ward one. It's demographic makeup is actually quite and anomaly. Always has been, but that's too much of really digging. It's so much easier to tell a half story with little understanding or consideration of what the data truly tells you.

Anonymous wrote:If teachers this year were able to raise student achievement (and the test scores will show whether that is the case), then it is BECAUSE OF this principal, not despite her. The scores for years under the old principal were terrible. The teachers for whatever reason under the old principal could not produce even the most barely acceptable threshold of test scores, making Cooke the worst elementary school in Ward 1 and the only one in the wars to be among the 40 worst schools in the District. It sounds like the teachers just don't like that the new principal is requiring that they teach what the kids don't know. Some teachers I am sure are also leaving for lack of performance under IMPACT and would not have the option to stay even if they wanted to do so. Either way, it sounds like the principal is on her way to turning around the school, which so needs to be turned around. I am excited for next year and beyond.

It seems like a lot of the ward 1 schools have similar demographics/income levels, in terms of having many students of color, non-English speakers, and low-income students. Tubman, Reed, Bruce-Monroe, and Cleveland, for example.

Right, because Tubman is so different from Cooke. Well, actually, it is--it has three times the number of homeless kids, and otherwise a very similar demographic profile. And much higher test scores.

It's good that the new Cooke principal is shaking things up--the school very much needs a shakeup.

[Anonymous]

Of course, much of Tubman's rise in test scores can be attributed to their former principal Harry Hughes, who has since moved up the ranks to become an instructional superintendent. It remains to be seen whether these test scores will be sustainable or if they were the result of his hard work over several years that will now go awry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course, much of Tubman's rise in test scores can be attributed to their former principal Harry Hughes, who has since moved up the ranks to become an instructional superintendent. It remains to be seen whether these test scores will be sustainable or if they were the result of his hard work over several years that will now go awry

... And Hughes is the superintendent for Cooke, which is great news for the school.

[Anonymous]

I think it's pretty safe to say that test scores at all the schools mentioned in this thread fall under the "remains to be seen" umbrella. Demographics in DCPS are changing as fewer families leave the city for the suburbs and choose to send their children to neighborhood schools when once they chose private schools, charters or WOTP schools via the lottery. Some will always go private and some will always leave the area, but there are not enough spaces at the "desirable" charters to match the desire and "desirable" DCPS have waitlists for IB preschoolers.

That is going to result in change, and at this point, it's not clear what that change will look like. I would like to think that our principal at Cooke will part of the positive changes to education in my part of the city. I believe that much of the negative feedback on this thread is coming from former staff members who, for various reasons, were displeased with the administration change. PP, I'm sorry that you didn't feel supported. I agree that it was a hard year in a lot of ways, including some of the ways you described. I am excited for next year - challenges and all. You are no longer involved with the school (voluntarily or not), and I don't really see the point of showing up on this board to bash the principal, accuse parents who question your motives and accuracy of being naive or somehow in the tank for Larkin. Your postings are cowardly, and frankly, they make me relieved that you're no longer at the school.

[Anonymous]

Look at the data. The scores fell more that 30% the year after Hughes left Tubman. That reminds me of another Instructional Superintendent who had grade results and was promoted. DCPS does alot of that. So the scores were NOT sustainable after he left.

Anonymous wrote:Of course, much of Tubman's rise in test scores can be attributed to their former principal Harry Hughes, who has since moved up the ranks to become an instructional superintendent. It remains to be seen whether these test scores will be sustainable or if they were the result of his hard work over several years that will now go awry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard a lot of teachers/staff are leaving this year. Is that true? If so, why?

I haven't heard who is leaving so can't say whether that rumor is true. But in general I would expect high turnover in any school after a principal's first year, especially at a school like Cooke where the prior principal did not leave by choice. The new principal has a clear mandate to improve the school in a way that the last principal simply did not care about.

What is that code for? What mandate does the new principal have for improvement, and how is it different from whatever the previous principal had?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Always two sides to every story... here's another side. The staff turnover rate can not be attributed to anything else but the leader. Implying that they were loyal to the previous principal or are lazy in some way is untrue. The new principal even applauded the entire staff for the students making significant gains during the year. The staffs loyalty is to the students..period. There is a room on the third floor. Lets not call it a "holding" room. Its a room where students that are being disruptive are sent...Long story short...it doesn't work. Anyone who is there everyday sees the broken windows, the chairs being thrown, the constant fights, and the students running the halls. And if you really do work at Cooke in Pre-k you don't have to look far for the disruptive students..because they run through your hallways. Everyday. Be clear about the priority of the safety of the students that the principal has. When you look at the new hires at Cooke..pay attention. The school will be full of new, first year teachers. When given the opportunity to retain proven teachers that the students are familiar with the principal chose unknown, teachers that only have student teacher experience. You cant count on two hands the number of teachers that are returning. That's a fact. The plan for Cooke? You'd have to ask the principal because she doesn't share that with anyone but her "favorites". When your staff doesn't feel appreciated...and they are a GOOD staff...they leave and find a principal who will.

It sounds like what we used to call "in-school suspension" but do they put all the kids from different grades in the same room? How are the little ones to avoid being terrorized and victimized by the older/bigger ones?