Why are the top elementary schools in NW better?

[Anonymous]

np here. We are in-boundary for Murch, and Murch has really had some ding-dong teachers in the past 7 years. It's totally possible that other high-achieving DCPS schools also have a ding-dong of a teacher in each grade, right?

[Anonymous]

I would agree about the sharper principals collecting better teachers, but principal tenure is a factor too.

If a principal has been at a school for 8 years, she has had a chance to form a quality staff.

The principal revolving door is very damaging to a school's culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:np here. We are in-boundary for Murch, and Murch has really had some ding-dong teachers in the past 7 years. It's totally possible that other high-achieving DCPS schools also have a ding-dong of a teacher in each grade, right?

Absolutely! Maybe not in each grade, but there are at least a few in every school building. Even good principals don't get rid of basically competent ding-dongs who do their jobs, but aren't very bright or roundly educated. It isn't actually a competitive workplace where only the brightest keep their positions, even in upper NW where the grossly negligent eventually get pushed out.

[Anonymous]

Well, at least they got a new art teacher this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:np here. We are in-boundary for Murch, and Murch has really had some ding-dong teachers in the past 7 years. It's totally possible that other high-achieving DCPS schools also have a ding-dong of a teacher in each grade, right?

Absolutely! Maybe not in each grade, but there are at least a few in every school building. Even good principals don't get rid of basically competent ding-dongs who do their jobs, but aren't very bright or roundly educated. It isn't actually a competitive workplace where only the brightest keep their positions, even in upper NW where the grossly negligent eventually get pushed out.

This is true. I also think there is a big difference between ding-dongs and grossly negligent teachers. At our upper NW school there are definitely a few in the ding-dong category my child has gone through k-4 and has had one teacher that I would put in the ding-dong category - but even with that my kids still learned something. Never had or even heard about a grossly negligent teacher.

[Anonymous]

Murch does have its share of teachers who are questionable, but also a string of questionable principals! The last 3 have not been impressive.

[Anonymous]

I don't think the money raised by NW schools is the cause of the discrepancy. At my school, Murch, there is a large achievement gap between black students and white students. I was shocked to have this issue presented this way (not "out of boundary" versus "in boundary" students - by race). Both black and white, both in- and out-of bounds students at Murch benefit from the PTA money (more supplies and teachers aids than other schools), but the discrepancy persists within one well-funded school. The relevant questions are why does this difference exist and how can it be eliminated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the money raised by NW schools is the cause of the discrepancy. At my school, Murch, there is a large achievement gap between black students and white students. I was shocked to have this issue presented this way (not "out of boundary" versus "in boundary" students - by race). Both black and white, both in- and out-of bounds students at Murch benefit from the PTA money (more supplies and teachers aids than other schools), but the discrepancy persists within one well-funded school. The relevant questions are why does this difference exist and how can it be eliminated?

Every school tracks test scores by race and schools (thought NCLB) are judged on their ability to close this gap. This gap exists EVERYWHERE, it exists in every socio-economic level, across the country. No one understands it and no one know how to fix it. It's actually one way to judge if a school is good, because if the black and latino students are doing well then then maybe it means that the school has found a way to do a good job of educating everyone. Unfortunately I don't think there is a school out there that can claim that ALL of its black and latino students are doing as well as their white counterparts. There may be a few upper NW schools that have a relatively small achievement gap - but the gap is there and I guess your point is, no amount of money erases this gap.

[Anonymous]

I am the OP. Thanks for all (well, almost all) of these comments. I had no idea the PTAs raised that much $ as a percentage of overall budget. The fact it is 6 figures stuns me -- let alone well into the 6 figures. It does give me a good question to ask at my local open house which is how much has our local PTA raised and what the school budget is.

I guess I just don't assume that a bunch of smart kids (or kids from privileged background) necessarily makes a good school. I would think good teachers, principals, decent facilities, etc. would be necssary to make a good school and so was trying to figure out whether or how JKLM (or whatever) were getting more than their fair share on these fronts.

It's interesting because the answer (other than PTA factor) seems to be probably not. That the quality of the teachers, curriculum, principals is probably same throughout the system. The principal longevity factor is interesting and idea that those around longer will have had longer to learn the system and leave their imprint on the faculty make-up and therefore that a series of short-timers could have a detrimental effect over time. So maybe I need to find out the recent "principal turnover" history at my school.

I've read news articles and such thru the years about lead in the schools or rats and I'm trying to figure out if the "top" DC schools are immune from these sorts of woes and if so why/how.

My question has nothing to do with socio-economic or racial achievement gaps and although I can see how it might be taken there I tried to make clear in my original post I already "got" that point and I was trying to tease out any other factors involved.

I was trying to understand how school hiring/firing decisions work and how budgets work and even how much curriculum leeway there is to figure out what power resides at the individual-school level and how it has been used to make certain schools so much more desired than others. Some of these answers have been helpful. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Also, Fenty has been sure that DCPS dollars have gone into NW schools. New playgrounds at Murch, Eaton, Hearst. Building additions / major renovations at Janney, Stoddert, Deal, Hardy, Wilson."

That's complete bull, just so we're clear. The renovations are spread out fairly throughout the city and, in fact, as others have pointed out, the school renovation plan was developed before Fentry became mayor.

I second that. This is complete BS! Schools all over DC--rich, poor are going through extensive renovations. Please check your facts before posting comments that breed animosity unecessarilyl

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Every school tracks test scores by race and schools (thought NCLB) are judged on their ability to close this gap. This gap exists EVERYWHERE, it exists in every socio-economic level, across the country. No one understands it and no one know how to fix it.

Slightly off topic, but I just wanted to throw my 2 cent sin to this comment. I disagree that no one knows what causes the gap -- it's mostly a socioeconomic one, not purely race. And for language arts/reading anyhow, the gap is very much a vocabulary gap. Kids from poorer families just don't hear anything like as many words by the time they are even three years old, as do kids from higher socioeconomic statuses.

Take a look at some of the research and findings on this topic here in this PPT if you are interested:

http://www.k12.wa.us/Curriculuminstruct/reading/readingfirst/presentations/Anita%20Archer-PrimaryVocabWA.ppt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:np here. We are in-boundary for Murch, and Murch has really had some ding-dong teachers in the past 7 years. It's totally possible that other high-achieving DCPS schools also have a ding-dong of a teacher in each grade, right?

Could you explain what a "ding-dong" teacher is?

[Anonymous]

I'm guessing it means ditzy, disorganized, a little flaky? Kind of ineffective but can basically follow the teacher's manual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it means ditzy, disorganized, a little flaky? Kind of ineffective but can basically follow the teacher's manual.

I'm not the one who posted the "ding-dong" term originally, but I heartily agreed. I would add that such teachers NEED the teacher's manual because they have such a limited understanding of the subjects they're teaching, even for elementary school. They're also not able to enrich the students' learning experience by drawing on any sort of background knowledge of their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think that some/most schools in NW are better than in other parts of town because the parents are wealthier and better educated, and then better prepare their children for school... hate to say it, but education starts at birth.

A school can be great and have all the money in the world but there is only so much "catch up" they can do if the child has little to no exposure to books/reading/early education.

Totally agree. Money is nice, but it is not a substitute for a well-prepared child entering school or a supportive family network at home. In many parts of this city, children are starting Kindergarten significantly behind. The key has to be mandatory early education - preferably starting at 2 or 3 in our most impoverished areas. Working with the entire family is crucial; schools can't do it all and it is not fair to lay it all at their doorsteps. As someone who works in this field, it cannot be understated how different the experiences of an upper NW kid is from a kid growing up a few miles away in SE. It's a disgrace, and most of us sitting comfortably in our nice middle and upper-middle class neighborhoods have no clue.