Maury Capitol Hill

[Anonymous]

It would also help retain the PK3 classrooms or even expand them so all inbound families can get free PK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, here are the proficiency PARCC scores for Maury and Miner

Rather than fix the problems at Miner, DCPS just wants to bury them by combining the school with Maury.

Maury

ELA 74.12
Math 64.32

Miner

ELA 7.75
Math 8.69

This data struck me. So much of this thread (and DCUM as a whole) is ECE parents who know very little about what happens when kids start learning and differentiation (or lack thereof) creates issues. Respectfully, if your only experience with public education is PK3, PK4, K or even 1st grade, you don't understand the ramifications of merging schools with such divergent test scores and classroom settings.

I think is going to be particularly challenging at a "mega school" like they are proposing. There would be 7-8 classes per grade. How will they support that many kids per grade? How many reading interventionists would be needed across both campuses, for example? How many would be provided?

What is DCPS' rationale for not tracking in elementary school? If DME does push this proposal through, could they allow for tracking to provide the appropriate level of reading, math, etc. instruction based on the levels of the students? This seems like the only way to properly combine both schools without sacrificing the learning of the children involved (both the above grade level and below grade level children).

are you new here?

Yes. Can you provide a helpful response now?

DP, but DCPS generally opposes tracking, especially in younger grades, for equity reasons. It's not just DC, this is a common viewpoint in urban school districts with high poverty, because when you have tracking and G&T programs in these schools, generally the honors/G&T programming fills with high-SES kids and you wind up with demographically segregated tracks. This isn't surprising as test scores also correlate with family income. But it looks and feels bad, especially in a city like DC where most poor people are black and most wealthy people are not.

So DCPS elementaries have virtually no tracking, and there are no G&T programs at all. Some of the middle schools have some tracking, especially in math, but generally only if it's a majority white school where you won't get de facto segregation. High schools have some tracking programs (like the IB program at Eastern) but by the time kids get to HS, families have already self-segregated by SES, with higher SES families fleeing for charters or the suburbs if they can't afford to live IB for the one (now two) DCPS high schools with decent test scores and college prospects. So it winds up being too little too late for families who want accelerated academic programming.

I should note that this viewpoint on tracking in urban public schools is so pervasive there was actually an entire episode of Abbott Elementary about it, in which the thesis was "G&T programs are racist and exclusionary" and the one character in the program who didn't originally agree with this was proven wrong and made to feel foolish.

Just to point out, in DC a G&T program would primarily benefit Black students. Banneker is a historical selective (gifted) school in DC with decades of successful Black grads, and nobody wants to get rid of Banneker. And every elementary school in DC no matter how it struggles has a handful of kids getting PARCC 4s and 5s who could greatly benefit from an accelerated program. This viewpoint that gifted programs are inherently racist is harmful to black kids.

Agree. I would go one step further and call it regressive to an entire race. The idea seems to be that if POC are afforded an opportunity to accelerate and get the benefit of advancement, that can only be permitted if it can be race means tested. Since we know SES correlates to academic success, and since we know SES skews non-POC in DC, the conclusion is that the only fair thing to do is make sure hard working, deserving POC don't get the benefit of advancement because it violates some perverse concept of equity. The message to hard working POC is that they must be viewed at all times as a POC monolith. Sorry if you work hard and want better than the minimum. We can't let you have that because we view all POC the same, and not on the merits of your own success and work product.

Sickeningly regressive and no different than self avowed racists who view all POC as being the same and defined by their least capable members.

And this is why Black families with resources tend to high-tail it out of DCPS and those with goals but fewer resources might opt for a charter.

Right, but this is a circular problem. Because when black families with resources leave, go private, or go charter, that means that that the black population in DCPS skews heavily towards at-risk kids. And that's what leads to a situation where an AAP program in a DCPS school will lead to de facto segregation. There are not a lot of poor white people in DC. So if you offer AAP, white students will have the resources to access it and the black students left in DCPS once black families with resources leave, won't.

Again, this is not a situation specific to DCPS. You see it in most urban school districts for similar reasons. However, one thing about DCPS that is frustrating is a refusal to come up with ANY solution other than "no tracking, no honors, no AAP" or "honors for all."

Honestly, in the elementary grades this winds up being less of an issue. You can offer acceleration in elementary without tracking because kids are still learning fundamentals. I have a kid who is accelerated at math and reading in a DCPS elementary and I'm pretty happy with what they do (pull outs to a higher grade for reading, she and two other students in class are in a small group for math that works above grade level). We also offer some enrichment and support at home using Beast Academy, but I don't stress a ton about it -- kid is above grade level and will be well prepared for pretty much any middle school she attends.

BUT that middle school probably won't be in DC specifically because of this problem. It's too late for us to get into a Deal or Hardy feeder via lottery and I just don't think we can swing buying in bound for either. That leaves us with our Ward 6 feed (SH) or charters. BASIS just isn't our style, it's not the school environment we envision of our kids. Latin is far and doesn't actually seem to offer much actual acceleration, just more on-grade level students. So we're look at suburbs and magnet programs. Annoyingly, we may have to leave sooner rather than later because in the suburbs, AAP actually does start in elementary, and if we wait for MS, our kid might be out of luck in terms of accessing.

Our second DD would probably do fine at SH or Latin, though. She's on grade level but doesn't need the extra challenge or acceleration that her sister really seems to need. It's just a shame that DC doesn't seem to meet the needs of both kids, and we don't want to shortchange either of them.

[Anonymous]

All feeders would have to do it. Since EH is under enrolled and has the space, it wouldn’t be difficult. Families could try out EH without the pressure of HS decisions around the corner. A four year school would be better for community building and buy in. There are many pros to this plan.

[Anonymous]

Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, here are the proficiency PARCC scores for Maury and Miner

Rather than fix the problems at Miner, DCPS just wants to bury them by combining the school with Maury.

Maury

ELA 74.12
Math 64.32

Miner

ELA 7.75
Math 8.69

This data struck me. So much of this thread (and DCUM as a whole) is ECE parents who know very little about what happens when kids start learning and differentiation (or lack thereof) creates issues. Respectfully, if your only experience with public education is PK3, PK4, K or even 1st grade, you don't understand the ramifications of merging schools with such divergent test scores and classroom settings.

I think is going to be particularly challenging at a "mega school" like they are proposing. There would be 7-8 classes per grade. How will they support that many kids per grade? How many reading interventionists would be needed across both campuses, for example? How many would be provided?

What is DCPS' rationale for not tracking in elementary school? If DME does push this proposal through, could they allow for tracking to provide the appropriate level of reading, math, etc. instruction based on the levels of the students? This seems like the only way to properly combine both schools without sacrificing the learning of the children involved (both the above grade level and below grade level children).

are you new here?

Yes. Can you provide a helpful response now?

DP, but DCPS generally opposes tracking, especially in younger grades, for equity reasons. It's not just DC, this is a common viewpoint in urban school districts with high poverty, because when you have tracking and G&T programs in these schools, generally the honors/G&T programming fills with high-SES kids and you wind up with demographically segregated tracks. This isn't surprising as test scores also correlate with family income. But it looks and feels bad, especially in a city like DC where most poor people are black and most wealthy people are not.

So DCPS elementaries have virtually no tracking, and there are no G&T programs at all. Some of the middle schools have some tracking, especially in math, but generally only if it's a majority white school where you won't get de facto segregation. High schools have some tracking programs (like the IB program at Eastern) but by the time kids get to HS, families have already self-segregated by SES, with higher SES families fleeing for charters or the suburbs if they can't afford to live IB for the one (now two) DCPS high schools with decent test scores and college prospects. So it winds up being too little too late for families who want accelerated academic programming.

I should note that this viewpoint on tracking in urban public schools is so pervasive there was actually an entire episode of Abbott Elementary about it, in which the thesis was "G&T programs are racist and exclusionary" and the one character in the program who didn't originally agree with this was proven wrong and made to feel foolish.

Just to point out, in DC a G&T program would primarily benefit Black students. Banneker is a historical selective (gifted) school in DC with decades of successful Black grads, and nobody wants to get rid of Banneker. And every elementary school in DC no matter how it struggles has a handful of kids getting PARCC 4s and 5s who could greatly benefit from an accelerated program. This viewpoint that gifted programs are inherently racist is harmful to black kids.

Agree. I would go one step further and call it regressive to an entire race. The idea seems to be that if POC are afforded an opportunity to accelerate and get the benefit of advancement, that can only be permitted if it can be race means tested. Since we know SES correlates to academic success, and since we know SES skews non-POC in DC, the conclusion is that the only fair thing to do is make sure hard working, deserving POC don't get the benefit of advancement because it violates some perverse concept of equity. The message to hard working POC is that they must be viewed at all times as a POC monolith. Sorry if you work hard and want better than the minimum. We can't let you have that because we view all POC the same, and not on the merits of your own success and work product.

Sickeningly regressive and no different than self avowed racists who view all POC as being the same and defined by their least capable members.

And this is why Black families with resources tend to high-tail it out of DCPS and those with goals but fewer resources might opt for a charter.

Right, but this is a circular problem. Because when black families with resources leave, go private, or go charter, that means that that the black population in DCPS skews heavily towards at-risk kids. And that's what leads to a situation where an AAP program in a DCPS school will lead to de facto segregation. There are not a lot of poor white people in DC. So if you offer AAP, white students will have the resources to access it and the black students left in DCPS once black families with resources leave, won't.

Again, this is not a situation specific to DCPS. You see it in most urban school districts for similar reasons. However, one thing about DCPS that is frustrating is a refusal to come up with ANY solution other than "no tracking, no honors, no AAP" or "honors for all."

Honestly, in the elementary grades this winds up being less of an issue. You can offer acceleration in elementary without tracking because kids are still learning fundamentals. I have a kid who is accelerated at math and reading in a DCPS elementary and I'm pretty happy with what they do (pull outs to a higher grade for reading, she and two other students in class are in a small group for math that works above grade level). We also offer some enrichment and support at home using Beast Academy, but I don't stress a ton about it -- kid is above grade level and will be well prepared for pretty much any middle school she attends.

BUT that middle school probably won't be in DC specifically because of this problem. It's too late for us to get into a Deal or Hardy feeder via lottery and I just don't think we can swing buying in bound for either. That leaves us with our Ward 6 feed (SH) or charters. BASIS just isn't our style, it's not the school environment we envision of our kids. Latin is far and doesn't actually seem to offer much actual acceleration, just more on-grade level students. So we're look at suburbs and magnet programs. Annoyingly, we may have to leave sooner rather than later because in the suburbs, AAP actually does start in elementary, and if we wait for MS, our kid might be out of luck in terms of accessing.

Our second DD would probably do fine at SH or Latin, though. She's on grade level but doesn't need the extra challenge or acceleration that her sister really seems to need. It's just a shame that DC doesn't seem to meet the needs of both kids, and we don't want to shortchange either of them.

I do not have words to describe the rage I feel when white saviors lecture POC with advanced kids about the importance of equity. They don't give a damn about my kid. They just want to burnish their woke credentials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, here are the proficiency PARCC scores for Maury and Miner

Rather than fix the problems at Miner, DCPS just wants to bury them by combining the school with Maury.

Maury

ELA 74.12
Math 64.32

Miner

ELA 7.75
Math 8.69

This data struck me. So much of this thread (and DCUM as a whole) is ECE parents who know very little about what happens when kids start learning and differentiation (or lack thereof) creates issues. Respectfully, if your only experience with public education is PK3, PK4, K or even 1st grade, you don't understand the ramifications of merging schools with such divergent test scores and classroom settings.

I think is going to be particularly challenging at a "mega school" like they are proposing. There would be 7-8 classes per grade. How will they support that many kids per grade? How many reading interventionists would be needed across both campuses, for example? How many would be provided?

What is DCPS' rationale for not tracking in elementary school? If DME does push this proposal through, could they allow for tracking to provide the appropriate level of reading, math, etc. instruction based on the levels of the students? This seems like the only way to properly combine both schools without sacrificing the learning of the children involved (both the above grade level and below grade level children).

are you new here?

Yes. Can you provide a helpful response now?

DP, but DCPS generally opposes tracking, especially in younger grades, for equity reasons. It's not just DC, this is a common viewpoint in urban school districts with high poverty, because when you have tracking and G&T programs in these schools, generally the honors/G&T programming fills with high-SES kids and you wind up with demographically segregated tracks. This isn't surprising as test scores also correlate with family income. But it looks and feels bad, especially in a city like DC where most poor people are black and most wealthy people are not.

So DCPS elementaries have virtually no tracking, and there are no G&T programs at all. Some of the middle schools have some tracking, especially in math, but generally only if it's a majority white school where you won't get de facto segregation. High schools have some tracking programs (like the IB program at Eastern) but by the time kids get to HS, families have already self-segregated by SES, with higher SES families fleeing for charters or the suburbs if they can't afford to live IB for the one (now two) DCPS high schools with decent test scores and college prospects. So it winds up being too little too late for families who want accelerated academic programming.

I should note that this viewpoint on tracking in urban public schools is so pervasive there was actually an entire episode of Abbott Elementary about it, in which the thesis was "G&T programs are racist and exclusionary" and the one character in the program who didn't originally agree with this was proven wrong and made to feel foolish.

Just to point out, in DC a G&T program would primarily benefit Black students. Banneker is a historical selective (gifted) school in DC with decades of successful Black grads, and nobody wants to get rid of Banneker. And every elementary school in DC no matter how it struggles has a handful of kids getting PARCC 4s and 5s who could greatly benefit from an accelerated program. This viewpoint that gifted programs are inherently racist is harmful to black kids.

Agree. I would go one step further and call it regressive to an entire race. The idea seems to be that if POC are afforded an opportunity to accelerate and get the benefit of advancement, that can only be permitted if it can be race means tested. Since we know SES correlates to academic success, and since we know SES skews non-POC in DC, the conclusion is that the only fair thing to do is make sure hard working, deserving POC don't get the benefit of advancement because it violates some perverse concept of equity. The message to hard working POC is that they must be viewed at all times as a POC monolith. Sorry if you work hard and want better than the minimum. We can't let you have that because we view all POC the same, and not on the merits of your own success and work product.

Sickeningly regressive and no different than self avowed racists who view all POC as being the same and defined by their least capable members.

And this is why Black families with resources tend to high-tail it out of DCPS and those with goals but fewer resources might opt for a charter.

Right, but this is a circular problem. Because when black families with resources leave, go private, or go charter, that means that that the black population in DCPS skews heavily towards at-risk kids. And that's what leads to a situation where an AAP program in a DCPS school will lead to de facto segregation. There are not a lot of poor white people in DC. So if you offer AAP, white students will have the resources to access it and the black students left in DCPS once black families with resources leave, won't.

Again, this is not a situation specific to DCPS. You see it in most urban school districts for similar reasons. However, one thing about DCPS that is frustrating is a refusal to come up with ANY solution other than "no tracking, no honors, no AAP" or "honors for all."

Honestly, in the elementary grades this winds up being less of an issue. You can offer acceleration in elementary without tracking because kids are still learning fundamentals. I have a kid who is accelerated at math and reading in a DCPS elementary and I'm pretty happy with what they do (pull outs to a higher grade for reading, she and two other students in class are in a small group for math that works above grade level). We also offer some enrichment and support at home using Beast Academy, but I don't stress a ton about it -- kid is above grade level and will be well prepared for pretty much any middle school she attends.

BUT that middle school probably won't be in DC specifically because of this problem. It's too late for us to get into a Deal or Hardy feeder via lottery and I just don't think we can swing buying in bound for either. That leaves us with our Ward 6 feed (SH) or charters. BASIS just isn't our style, it's not the school environment we envision of our kids. Latin is far and doesn't actually seem to offer much actual acceleration, just more on-grade level students. So we're look at suburbs and magnet programs. Annoyingly, we may have to leave sooner rather than later because in the suburbs, AAP actually does start in elementary, and if we wait for MS, our kid might be out of luck in terms of accessing.

Our second DD would probably do fine at SH or Latin, though. She's on grade level but doesn't need the extra challenge or acceleration that her sister really seems to need. It's just a shame that DC doesn't seem to meet the needs of both kids, and we don't want to shortchange either of them.

I do not have words to describe the rage I feel when white saviors lecture POC with advanced kids about the importance of equity. They don't give a damn about my kid. They just want to burnish their woke credentials.

You literally do not exist in this discourse. I would be pissed too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

What? SH formally tracks for math. You may be referring to the low key English tracking. Pre-pandemic, they used to formally track. That disappeared with PARCC scores. It hasn't come back even with the reappearance of PARCC scores... but it appears that quite a few MSers coming out of LT last year were placed in 7th grade English even though that wasn't advertised as a thing. (I assume it happened to other kids too, I just only know the LT kids.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, here are the proficiency PARCC scores for Maury and Miner

Rather than fix the problems at Miner, DCPS just wants to bury them by combining the school with Maury.

Maury

ELA 74.12
Math 64.32

Miner

ELA 7.75
Math 8.69

This data struck me. So much of this thread (and DCUM as a whole) is ECE parents who know very little about what happens when kids start learning and differentiation (or lack thereof) creates issues. Respectfully, if your only experience with public education is PK3, PK4, K or even 1st grade, you don't understand the ramifications of merging schools with such divergent test scores and classroom settings.

I think is going to be particularly challenging at a "mega school" like they are proposing. There would be 7-8 classes per grade. How will they support that many kids per grade? How many reading interventionists would be needed across both campuses, for example? How many would be provided?

What is DCPS' rationale for not tracking in elementary school? If DME does push this proposal through, could they allow for tracking to provide the appropriate level of reading, math, etc. instruction based on the levels of the students? This seems like the only way to properly combine both schools without sacrificing the learning of the children involved (both the above grade level and below grade level children).

are you new here?

Yes. Can you provide a helpful response now?

DP, but DCPS generally opposes tracking, especially in younger grades, for equity reasons. It's not just DC, this is a common viewpoint in urban school districts with high poverty, because when you have tracking and G&T programs in these schools, generally the honors/G&T programming fills with high-SES kids and you wind up with demographically segregated tracks. This isn't surprising as test scores also correlate with family income. But it looks and feels bad, especially in a city like DC where most poor people are black and most wealthy people are not.

So DCPS elementaries have virtually no tracking, and there are no G&T programs at all. Some of the middle schools have some tracking, especially in math, but generally only if it's a majority white school where you won't get de facto segregation. High schools have some tracking programs (like the IB program at Eastern) but by the time kids get to HS, families have already self-segregated by SES, with higher SES families fleeing for charters or the suburbs if they can't afford to live IB for the one (now two) DCPS high schools with decent test scores and college prospects. So it winds up being too little too late for families who want accelerated academic programming.

I should note that this viewpoint on tracking in urban public schools is so pervasive there was actually an entire episode of Abbott Elementary about it, in which the thesis was "G&T programs are racist and exclusionary" and the one character in the program who didn't originally agree with this was proven wrong and made to feel foolish.

Just to point out, in DC a G&T program would primarily benefit Black students. Banneker is a historical selective (gifted) school in DC with decades of successful Black grads, and nobody wants to get rid of Banneker. And every elementary school in DC no matter how it struggles has a handful of kids getting PARCC 4s and 5s who could greatly benefit from an accelerated program. This viewpoint that gifted programs are inherently racist is harmful to black kids.

Agree. I would go one step further and call it regressive to an entire race. The idea seems to be that if POC are afforded an opportunity to accelerate and get the benefit of advancement, that can only be permitted if it can be race means tested. Since we know SES correlates to academic success, and since we know SES skews non-POC in DC, the conclusion is that the only fair thing to do is make sure hard working, deserving POC don't get the benefit of advancement because it violates some perverse concept of equity. The message to hard working POC is that they must be viewed at all times as a POC monolith. Sorry if you work hard and want better than the minimum. We can't let you have that because we view all POC the same, and not on the merits of your own success and work product.

Sickeningly regressive and no different than self avowed racists who view all POC as being the same and defined by their least capable members.

And this is why Black families with resources tend to high-tail it out of DCPS and those with goals but fewer resources might opt for a charter.

Right, but this is a circular problem. Because when black families with resources leave, go private, or go charter, that means that that the black population in DCPS skews heavily towards at-risk kids. And that's what leads to a situation where an AAP program in a DCPS school will lead to de facto segregation. There are not a lot of poor white people in DC. So if you offer AAP, white students will have the resources to access it and the black students left in DCPS once black families with resources leave, won't.

Again, this is not a situation specific to DCPS. You see it in most urban school districts for similar reasons. However, one thing about DCPS that is frustrating is a refusal to come up with ANY solution other than "no tracking, no honors, no AAP" or "honors for all."

Honestly, in the elementary grades this winds up being less of an issue. You can offer acceleration in elementary without tracking because kids are still learning fundamentals. I have a kid who is accelerated at math and reading in a DCPS elementary and I'm pretty happy with what they do (pull outs to a higher grade for reading, she and two other students in class are in a small group for math that works above grade level). We also offer some enrichment and support at home using Beast Academy, but I don't stress a ton about it -- kid is above grade level and will be well prepared for pretty much any middle school she attends.

BUT that middle school probably won't be in DC specifically because of this problem. It's too late for us to get into a Deal or Hardy feeder via lottery and I just don't think we can swing buying in bound for either. That leaves us with our Ward 6 feed (SH) or charters. BASIS just isn't our style, it's not the school environment we envision of our kids. Latin is far and doesn't actually seem to offer much actual acceleration, just more on-grade level students. So we're look at suburbs and magnet programs. Annoyingly, we may have to leave sooner rather than later because in the suburbs, AAP actually does start in elementary, and if we wait for MS, our kid might be out of luck in terms of accessing.

Our second DD would probably do fine at SH or Latin, though. She's on grade level but doesn't need the extra challenge or acceleration that her sister really seems to need. It's just a shame that DC doesn't seem to meet the needs of both kids, and we don't want to shortchange either of them.

I do not have words to describe the rage I feel when white saviors lecture POC with advanced kids about the importance of equity. They don't give a damn about my kid. They just want to burnish their woke credentials.

SAME HERE. The worst is when they publish news articles praising themselves. Meanwhile those people have never once said a kind word to me or my kids except to match their ugly behinds to my house to tell me where my kids should go to school. Disgusting people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, here are the proficiency PARCC scores for Maury and Miner

Rather than fix the problems at Miner, DCPS just wants to bury them by combining the school with Maury.

Maury

ELA 74.12
Math 64.32

Miner

ELA 7.75
Math 8.69

This data struck me. So much of this thread (and DCUM as a whole) is ECE parents who know very little about what happens when kids start learning and differentiation (or lack thereof) creates issues. Respectfully, if your only experience with public education is PK3, PK4, K or even 1st grade, you don't understand the ramifications of merging schools with such divergent test scores and classroom settings.

I think is going to be particularly challenging at a "mega school" like they are proposing. There would be 7-8 classes per grade. How will they support that many kids per grade? How many reading interventionists would be needed across both campuses, for example? How many would be provided?

What is DCPS' rationale for not tracking in elementary school? If DME does push this proposal through, could they allow for tracking to provide the appropriate level of reading, math, etc. instruction based on the levels of the students? This seems like the only way to properly combine both schools without sacrificing the learning of the children involved (both the above grade level and below grade level children).

are you new here?

Yes. Can you provide a helpful response now?

DP, but DCPS generally opposes tracking, especially in younger grades, for equity reasons. It's not just DC, this is a common viewpoint in urban school districts with high poverty, because when you have tracking and G&T programs in these schools, generally the honors/G&T programming fills with high-SES kids and you wind up with demographically segregated tracks. This isn't surprising as test scores also correlate with family income. But it looks and feels bad, especially in a city like DC where most poor people are black and most wealthy people are not.

So DCPS elementaries have virtually no tracking, and there are no G&T programs at all. Some of the middle schools have some tracking, especially in math, but generally only if it's a majority white school where you won't get de facto segregation. High schools have some tracking programs (like the IB program at Eastern) but by the time kids get to HS, families have already self-segregated by SES, with higher SES families fleeing for charters or the suburbs if they can't afford to live IB for the one (now two) DCPS high schools with decent test scores and college prospects. So it winds up being too little too late for families who want accelerated academic programming.

I should note that this viewpoint on tracking in urban public schools is so pervasive there was actually an entire episode of Abbott Elementary about it, in which the thesis was "G&T programs are racist and exclusionary" and the one character in the program who didn't originally agree with this was proven wrong and made to feel foolish.

Just to point out, in DC a G&T program would primarily benefit Black students. Banneker is a historical selective (gifted) school in DC with decades of successful Black grads, and nobody wants to get rid of Banneker. And every elementary school in DC no matter how it struggles has a handful of kids getting PARCC 4s and 5s who could greatly benefit from an accelerated program. This viewpoint that gifted programs are inherently racist is harmful to black kids.

Agree. I would go one step further and call it regressive to an entire race. The idea seems to be that if POC are afforded an opportunity to accelerate and get the benefit of advancement, that can only be permitted if it can be race means tested. Since we know SES correlates to academic success, and since we know SES skews non-POC in DC, the conclusion is that the only fair thing to do is make sure hard working, deserving POC don't get the benefit of advancement because it violates some perverse concept of equity. The message to hard working POC is that they must be viewed at all times as a POC monolith. Sorry if you work hard and want better than the minimum. We can't let you have that because we view all POC the same, and not on the merits of your own success and work product.

Sickeningly regressive and no different than self avowed racists who view all POC as being the same and defined by their least capable members.

And this is why Black families with resources tend to high-tail it out of DCPS and those with goals but fewer resources might opt for a charter.

Right, but this is a circular problem. Because when black families with resources leave, go private, or go charter, that means that that the black population in DCPS skews heavily towards at-risk kids. And that's what leads to a situation where an AAP program in a DCPS school will lead to de facto segregation. There are not a lot of poor white people in DC. So if you offer AAP, white students will have the resources to access it and the black students left in DCPS once black families with resources leave, won't.

Again, this is not a situation specific to DCPS. You see it in most urban school districts for similar reasons. However, one thing about DCPS that is frustrating is a refusal to come up with ANY solution other than "no tracking, no honors, no AAP" or "honors for all."

Honestly, in the elementary grades this winds up being less of an issue. You can offer acceleration in elementary without tracking because kids are still learning fundamentals. I have a kid who is accelerated at math and reading in a DCPS elementary and I'm pretty happy with what they do (pull outs to a higher grade for reading, she and two other students in class are in a small group for math that works above grade level). We also offer some enrichment and support at home using Beast Academy, but I don't stress a ton about it -- kid is above grade level and will be well prepared for pretty much any middle school she attends.

BUT that middle school probably won't be in DC specifically because of this problem. It's too late for us to get into a Deal or Hardy feeder via lottery and I just don't think we can swing buying in bound for either. That leaves us with our Ward 6 feed (SH) or charters. BASIS just isn't our style, it's not the school environment we envision of our kids. Latin is far and doesn't actually seem to offer much actual acceleration, just more on-grade level students. So we're look at suburbs and magnet programs. Annoyingly, we may have to leave sooner rather than later because in the suburbs, AAP actually does start in elementary, and if we wait for MS, our kid might be out of luck in terms of accessing.

Our second DD would probably do fine at SH or Latin, though. She's on grade level but doesn't need the extra challenge or acceleration that her sister really seems to need. It's just a shame that DC doesn't seem to meet the needs of both kids, and we don't want to shortchange either of them.

I do not have words to describe the rage I feel when white saviors lecture POC with advanced kids about the importance of equity. They don't give a damn about my kid. They just want to burnish their woke credentials.

Meh. I’m sure you’re willing to use “equity” when you’re trying to get something for your advanced kid. White people don’t have a monopoly on using equity to get what they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

What? SH formally tracks for math. You may be referring to the low key English tracking. Pre-pandemic, they used to formally track. That disappeared with PARCC scores. It hasn't come back even with the reappearance of PARCC scores... but it appears that quite a few MSers coming out of LT last year were placed in 7th grade English even though that wasn't advertised as a thing. (I assume it happened to other kids too, I just only know the LT kids.)

Then someone should tell SH! Go to the open house and ask if SH has a formal tracking process for advanced kids. They won't admit to a formal program. Find me anywhere on the website or in any documentation where they talk about it.

Buy-in from skeptical parents requires full throated endorsement of a formal honors and tracking program. It must be endorsed by Central and not just something a Principal is willing to do while s/he is there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

We know multiple families planning to attend EH, and are among them. Admittedly, this cluster idea is making us reconsider our plans, since we have younger kids and need a path for all of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone suggesting that an E-H solution would draw kids away from BASIS and Latin ignores the reality of how short the MS years are and how bad the Hill HS situation is. If you don't want and can't leave DC or move for 9th, you have no choice but to take the Latin or BASIS exit if you are lucky enough to be offered it. MS is 3 years, and there's only 2 years of it before you need to have an idea of what your HS plan is. I sincerely hope E-H and all Hill schools get their sh*t together and prosper in the coming years. But I can tell you from experience that families without guaranteed HS options (ability to move, $ to pay for private) are generally not going to be motivated by nonspecific promises of some sort of "tracking light" at E-H. Step one to getting buy-in at E-H or SH is to stand up and offer a formal tracking process. No more of this nonsense where SH doesn't advertise tracking but allows students to take math classes with the year above and pretends it isn't happening.

This. EH is filled with families who struck out in the lottery and are trying to get a few more years in the city / hoping to lottery into Walls. IB families are not “choosing” EH.

There are absolutely EH families that choose EH over one of those charters … I’m under no illusions about having to find a different solution for HS but so far so good.

So you "chose" EH over a spot at Latin? Even though you won't use your IB HS? You are an example of what I described my friend. You feel you have options for HS; private $, move within DC, move out of DC, etc.

This. People will talk about going to EH or SH (or Jefferson) but their plan for HS is Walls, Banneker, private, or move. The plan is never Eastern. So it's tiresome when people talk about increased buy in for SH and EH (and let's get real about how much increased buy-in these schools are getting) without acknowledging that this is just people postponing their Plan Bs a few more years, not actually buying into the Ward 6 high school.