Advice on Two River PCS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’ve come to the (somewhat sobering) realization that the best environment for our kids is one with a very narrow range of academic abilities, minimal exposure to trauma, and few—if any—single-parent households. For us, that also means avoiding situations where teachers and classmates are frequently managing unresolved behavioral or social-emotional challenges, including some of the more difficult or disruptive neurodivergences.

I fully respect that the public system must educate and support every child, and I believe in that mission. But we also had to be honest about what works best for our own children’s learning and well-being. For us, that meant finding a school where those kinds of distractions are almost nonexistent, so the focus stays on rigorous academics and a calm, orderly classroom environment.

YIKES

I am unclear why the PP's preference for two-parent households is any more "yikes" than their preference for kids who are neurotypical, have not been exposed to trauma, and who have are mostly at or above grade level academically.

And I'm not judging. I totally get where this person is coming from and there are days when I feel this way too. The thing for me is that I grew up with a lot of trauma and definitely had unresolved social emotional issues as a kid, and maybe neurodivergence as well. So I'm never going to to choose my kids school to avoid people like that, because that's me -- I will never not have a place in my heart for those kids even as I'm raising my kid to not have to BE one of those kids. But I also understand why other parents seek to avoid kids like this, even as it breaks my heart because it makes me think about how often I was rejected by other family's growing up and didn't really even understand why. I didn't know that I was problematic because it was all I knew. I didn't get that until I was adult and then retrospectively understood why sometimes I never got invited back to a classmates house, or why I was excluded from certain communities.

But the idea that wanting to avoid kids from single-parent households is over the line, but wanting to avoid kids with other kinds of problems is understandable ignores the fact that no kid chooses any of that. It just happens to you. You're a child.

Because it's racist and classist. They don't mean ANY single parents, they mean poor black ones.

But not all divorced parents are poor and black. And not all black families are single parent homes. I'm sorry, I don't get this. Also this is an anonymous board, I think if the PP meant they didn't want their kids going to school with poor kids (which in DC means poor and black because of the city's demographics) they would just say that.

Also in DC if someone is sending their kids to a charter, I assume they are partly motivated by wanting to send their kids to a school where the population of poor black kids is at least smaller than it is at their IB DCPS. Two Rivers is the poster child for this because it's not offering some specialized program like Montessori or immersion, and for a long time its family population was drawn from the JOW and L-T boundaries, both (at the time) Title I schools with large at risk populations. Then L-T lost it's Title I status and now you rarely see families IB for L-T choosing Two Rivers.

Not saying it's good, but I'd rather people be honest about it than pretend it's not what is happening. A parent who is willing to admit they are trying to avoid poor families, single parent homes, kids with severe disabilities, and other at risk factors is at least telling you the truth.

I agree with this. The deeper issue is what happens when a school’s culture and day-to-day environment become significantly shaped—if not dominated—by the needs of certain high-needs student populations. Given the reality of limited resources and how schools actually operate, that often makes it harder to adequately serve other students.

Is this inevitable? No—in a perfectly resourced and flexible system, with the ability to redistribute students and tailor programs, you could imagine it working differently. But under the current structure, it usually doesn’t. That’s why I think better models are things like the old METCO program in Massachusetts, which took kids from modest means but with generally stable family structures and placed them in more affluent school environments. In that setup, they’re enveloped in a certain type of school culture rather than the culture being dominated by the challenges of a high-needs population.

And it’s worth pointing out that even from an individual high-needs family’s perspective, there’s often an advantage to having their child in a setting where the overall concentration of high-needs students is lower. The logic is straightforward: if the school’s resources aren’t constantly stretched across a very large cluster of high-need situations, there’s a better chance your child—whether high-need or not—gets more individual attention and access to enrichment. In that sense, a parent from a high-needs background might reasonably say, “I’d rather my kid be in a school where there are fewer high-needs kids,” because they believe their child will benefit more.

When you look at it that way, the choices families make—whether affluent, middle-income, or low-income—aren’t really all that different. People are often trying to secure the same thing: a school culture and resource environment where their own child has the best shot to thrive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’ve come to the (somewhat sobering) realization that the best environment for our kids is one with a very narrow range of academic abilities, minimal exposure to trauma, and few—if any—single-parent households. For us, that also means avoiding situations where teachers and classmates are frequently managing unresolved behavioral or social-emotional challenges, including some of the more difficult or disruptive neurodivergences.

I fully respect that the public system must educate and support every child, and I believe in that mission. But we also had to be honest about what works best for our own children’s learning and well-being. For us, that meant finding a school where those kinds of distractions are almost nonexistent, so the focus stays on rigorous academics and a calm, orderly classroom environment.

YIKES

I am unclear why the PP's preference for two-parent households is any more "yikes" than their preference for kids who are neurotypical, have not been exposed to trauma, and who have are mostly at or above grade level academically.

And I'm not judging. I totally get where this person is coming from and there are days when I feel this way too. The thing for me is that I grew up with a lot of trauma and definitely had unresolved social emotional issues as a kid, and maybe neurodivergence as well. So I'm never going to to choose my kids school to avoid people like that, because that's me -- I will never not have a place in my heart for those kids even as I'm raising my kid to not have to BE one of those kids. But I also understand why other parents seek to avoid kids like this, even as it breaks my heart because it makes me think about how often I was rejected by other family's growing up and didn't really even understand why. I didn't know that I was problematic because it was all I knew. I didn't get that until I was adult and then retrospectively understood why sometimes I never got invited back to a classmates house, or why I was excluded from certain communities.

But the idea that wanting to avoid kids from single-parent households is over the line, but wanting to avoid kids with other kinds of problems is understandable ignores the fact that no kid chooses any of that. It just happens to you. You're a child.

Because it's racist and classist. They don't mean ANY single parents, they mean poor black ones.

But as a parent — and a Black parent — that label is almost beside the point when you’re making decisions for your own children. Many of us who are Black are more vulnerable in situations where there’s a high concentration of at-risk Black children in the building. In those settings, a school’s expectations, policies, and focus can be hard to disentangle from the race of the child. Put your Black kids in that environment and you can get all sorts of toxic, complicated dynamics: Where do they “fit”? How are they treated? And let’s be honest — in some schools, a high-performing Black child is so rare it’s treated like a unicorn, and not always in a good way.

This right here. The people who scream "RACISM" are rarely high performing black families. Mostly white folks trying to burnish their liberal credentials. And the usual suspects of black folks who seem to deify or excuse bad behavior as being "blackness". Same people who are more concerned about incarcerated young black men than the law abiding young black men who are victimized.

The irony of it all is that for those of us who started at TR, the UMC and high performing black families were the canary in the coal mine. They peeled off in 1st, 2nd and 3rd long before white families realized there was a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’ve come to the (somewhat sobering) realization that the best environment for our kids is one with a very narrow range of academic abilities, minimal exposure to trauma, and few—if any—single-parent households. For us, that also means avoiding situations where teachers and classmates are frequently managing unresolved behavioral or social-emotional challenges, including some of the more difficult or disruptive neurodivergences.

I fully respect that the public system must educate and support every child, and I believe in that mission. But we also had to be honest about what works best for our own children’s learning and well-being. For us, that meant finding a school where those kinds of distractions are almost nonexistent, so the focus stays on rigorous academics and a calm, orderly classroom environment.

YIKES

I am unclear why the PP's preference for two-parent households is any more "yikes" than their preference for kids who are neurotypical, have not been exposed to trauma, and who have are mostly at or above grade level academically.

And I'm not judging. I totally get where this person is coming from and there are days when I feel this way too. The thing for me is that I grew up with a lot of trauma and definitely had unresolved social emotional issues as a kid, and maybe neurodivergence as well. So I'm never going to to choose my kids school to avoid people like that, because that's me -- I will never not have a place in my heart for those kids even as I'm raising my kid to not have to BE one of those kids. But I also understand why other parents seek to avoid kids like this, even as it breaks my heart because it makes me think about how often I was rejected by other family's growing up and didn't really even understand why. I didn't know that I was problematic because it was all I knew. I didn't get that until I was adult and then retrospectively understood why sometimes I never got invited back to a classmates house, or why I was excluded from certain communities.

But the idea that wanting to avoid kids from single-parent households is over the line, but wanting to avoid kids with other kinds of problems is understandable ignores the fact that no kid chooses any of that. It just happens to you. You're a child.

Because it's racist and classist. They don't mean ANY single parents, they mean poor black ones.

But as a parent — and a Black parent — that label is almost beside the point when you’re making decisions for your own children. Many of us who are Black are more vulnerable in situations where there’s a high concentration of at-risk Black children in the building. In those settings, a school’s expectations, policies, and focus can be hard to disentangle from the race of the child. Put your Black kids in that environment and you can get all sorts of toxic, complicated dynamics: Where do they “fit”? How are they treated? And let’s be honest — in some schools, a high-performing Black child is so rare it’s treated like a unicorn, and not always in a good way.

This right here. The people who scream "RACISM" are rarely high performing black families. Mostly white folks trying to burnish their liberal credentials. And the usual suspects of black folks who seem to deify or excuse bad behavior as being "blackness". Same people who are more concerned about incarcerated young black men than the law abiding young black men who are victimized.

The irony of it all is that for those of us who started at TR, the UMC and high performing black families were the canary in the coal mine. They peeled off in 1st, 2nd and 3rd long before white families realized there was a problem.

Yes - black families of means and options probably feel the stakes are too great to wait around; white families, while hardly satisfied, might (correctly) reason that they can sufficiently mitigate/navigate at least until middle school. And by “white families,” I mean “DC whites families,” who are unique in risk tolerance vs upper NW and suburban white folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’ve come to the (somewhat sobering) realization that the best environment for our kids is one with a very narrow range of academic abilities, minimal exposure to trauma, and few—if any—single-parent households. For us, that also means avoiding situations where teachers and classmates are frequently managing unresolved behavioral or social-emotional challenges, including some of the more difficult or disruptive neurodivergences.

I fully respect that the public system must educate and support every child, and I believe in that mission. But we also had to be honest about what works best for our own children’s learning and well-being. For us, that meant finding a school where those kinds of distractions are almost nonexistent, so the focus stays on rigorous academics and a calm, orderly classroom environment.

YIKES

I am unclear why the PP's preference for two-parent households is any more "yikes" than their preference for kids who are neurotypical, have not been exposed to trauma, and who have are mostly at or above grade level academically.

And I'm not judging. I totally get where this person is coming from and there are days when I feel this way too. The thing for me is that I grew up with a lot of trauma and definitely had unresolved social emotional issues as a kid, and maybe neurodivergence as well. So I'm never going to to choose my kids school to avoid people like that, because that's me -- I will never not have a place in my heart for those kids even as I'm raising my kid to not have to BE one of those kids. But I also understand why other parents seek to avoid kids like this, even as it breaks my heart because it makes me think about how often I was rejected by other family's growing up and didn't really even understand why. I didn't know that I was problematic because it was all I knew. I didn't get that until I was adult and then retrospectively understood why sometimes I never got invited back to a classmates house, or why I was excluded from certain communities.

But the idea that wanting to avoid kids from single-parent households is over the line, but wanting to avoid kids with other kinds of problems is understandable ignores the fact that no kid chooses any of that. It just happens to you. You're a child.

Because it's racist and classist. They don't mean ANY single parents, they mean poor black ones.

But as a parent — and a Black parent — that label is almost beside the point when you’re making decisions for your own children. Many of us who are Black are more vulnerable in situations where there’s a high concentration of at-risk Black children in the building. In those settings, a school’s expectations, policies, and focus can be hard to disentangle from the race of the child. Put your Black kids in that environment and you can get all sorts of toxic, complicated dynamics: Where do they “fit”? How are they treated? And let’s be honest — in some schools, a high-performing Black child is so rare it’s treated like a unicorn, and not always in a good way.

This right here. The people who scream "RACISM" are rarely high performing black families. Mostly white folks trying to burnish their liberal credentials. And the usual suspects of black folks who seem to deify or excuse bad behavior as being "blackness". Same people who are more concerned about incarcerated young black men than the law abiding young black men who are victimized.

The irony of it all is that for those of us who started at TR, the UMC and high performing black families were the canary in the coal mine. They peeled off in 1st, 2nd and 3rd long before white families realized there was a problem.

Yes, and the reason we left was academic, not behavioral. TR is very touch feeling and nice, I don't know anyone who thinks the TR4 campus has serious behavioral concerns. For us it was becoming very concerned with academic progress and worrying that the longer we stayed, the further behind our child would fall. My observation is that white families were less concerned about this in K and 1st (we left in 2nd and I wish we'd left a year earlier) and viewed these grades as extensions of PK. We switched to a DCPS and are much happier.

[Anonymous]

White family here who left after 2nd and wish we'd left sooner. I'd say we probably fall in the category of the families who were "less concerned" about the perceived academic issues. We did not think there were serious behavioral issues but it became clear at the beginning of 2nd grade (and if I'm honest with myself, towards the end of 1st) that our daughter was not learning what she needed to learn. We switched to DCPS for 3rd and are also much happier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’ve come to the (somewhat sobering) realization that the best environment for our kids is one with a very narrow range of academic abilities, minimal exposure to trauma, and few—if any—single-parent households. For us, that also means avoiding situations where teachers and classmates are frequently managing unresolved behavioral or social-emotional challenges, including some of the more difficult or disruptive neurodivergences.

I fully respect that the public system must educate and support every child, and I believe in that mission. But we also had to be honest about what works best for our own children’s learning and well-being. For us, that meant finding a school where those kinds of distractions are almost nonexistent, so the focus stays on rigorous academics and a calm, orderly classroom environment.

YIKES

I am unclear why the PP's preference for two-parent households is any more "yikes" than their preference for kids who are neurotypical, have not been exposed to trauma, and who have are mostly at or above grade level academically.

And I'm not judging. I totally get where this person is coming from and there are days when I feel this way too. The thing for me is that I grew up with a lot of trauma and definitely had unresolved social emotional issues as a kid, and maybe neurodivergence as well. So I'm never going to to choose my kids school to avoid people like that, because that's me -- I will never not have a place in my heart for those kids even as I'm raising my kid to not have to BE one of those kids. But I also understand why other parents seek to avoid kids like this, even as it breaks my heart because it makes me think about how often I was rejected by other family's growing up and didn't really even understand why. I didn't know that I was problematic because it was all I knew. I didn't get that until I was adult and then retrospectively understood why sometimes I never got invited back to a classmates house, or why I was excluded from certain communities.

But the idea that wanting to avoid kids from single-parent households is over the line, but wanting to avoid kids with other kinds of problems is understandable ignores the fact that no kid chooses any of that. It just happens to you. You're a child.

Because it's racist and classist. They don't mean ANY single parents, they mean poor black ones.

But as a parent — and a Black parent — that label is almost beside the point when you’re making decisions for your own children. Many of us who are Black are more vulnerable in situations where there’s a high concentration of at-risk Black children in the building. In those settings, a school’s expectations, policies, and focus can be hard to disentangle from the race of the child. Put your Black kids in that environment and you can get all sorts of toxic, complicated dynamics: Where do they “fit”? How are they treated? And let’s be honest — in some schools, a high-performing Black child is so rare it’s treated like a unicorn, and not always in a good way.

This right here. The people who scream "RACISM" are rarely high performing black families. Mostly white folks trying to burnish their liberal credentials. And the usual suspects of black folks who seem to deify or excuse bad behavior as being "blackness". Same people who are more concerned about incarcerated young black men than the law abiding young black men who are victimized.

The irony of it all is that for those of us who started at TR, the UMC and high performing black families were the canary in the coal mine. They peeled off in 1st, 2nd and 3rd long before white families realized there was a problem.

Yes, and the reason we left was academic, not behavioral. TR is very touch feeling and nice, I don't know anyone who thinks the TR4 campus has serious behavioral concerns. For us it was becoming very concerned with academic progress and worrying that the longer we stayed, the further behind our child would fall. My observation is that white families were less concerned about this in K and 1st (we left in 2nd and I wish we'd left a year earlier) and viewed these grades as extensions of PK. We switched to a DCPS and are much happier.

Some are not as concerned, but some really prefer it that way. Either for philosophical reasons or because they feel their child isn't ready for a more academic setting.

It's all too common for schools to have a nice, warm, crunchy preschool and then struggle with the pivot to really strong academics, unfortunately. Parents want one thing, then they want the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:White family here who left after 2nd and wish we'd left sooner. I'd say we probably fall in the category of the families who were "less concerned" about the perceived academic issues. We did not think there were serious behavioral issues but it became clear at the beginning of 2nd grade (and if I'm honest with myself, towards the end of 1st) that our daughter was not learning what she needed to learn. We switched to DCPS for 3rd and are also much happier.

Black parent here. Looking strictly through the narrow lens of MAP scores, my kids were doing great—fantastic, even—but I honestly attribute that almost entirely to what we were doing outside of school, especially with math enrichment, not to what was happening day-to-day in the classroom.

I also did experience some behavioral issues, particularly with my older child’s cohort. Some of it was just a lack of seriousness in the room and certain behaviors being tolerated—probably because some kids had documented issues, so teachers felt they had to be tolerated. But my son would complain about not being able to get the teacher’s attention because other kids were taking all of it. That’s not catastrophic, and I told him to roll with it, but over time I could see it making him more cynical about school.

And while I don’t think my kids suffered academically, I do think they were learning to coast—which can really come back to bite them later. When expectations are low and the work doesn’t push them, they start thinking “good enough” is fine, and that’s a hard mindset to break in the upper grades.

On top of that, we rarely got homework back with any meaningful feedback or red marks. Even if kids are testing well, they’re missing out on the kind of academic discipline they’ll need later. So between the classroom culture and the lack of rigor in day-to-day work, we decided to make a change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White family here who left after 2nd and wish we'd left sooner. I'd say we probably fall in the category of the families who were "less concerned" about the perceived academic issues. We did not think there were serious behavioral issues but it became clear at the beginning of 2nd grade (and if I'm honest with myself, towards the end of 1st) that our daughter was not learning what she needed to learn. We switched to DCPS for 3rd and are also much happier.

Black parent here. Looking strictly through the narrow lens of MAP scores, my kids were doing great—fantastic, even—but I honestly attribute that almost entirely to what we were doing outside of school, especially with math enrichment, not to what was happening day-to-day in the classroom.

I also did experience some behavioral issues, particularly with my older child’s cohort. Some of it was just a lack of seriousness in the room and certain behaviors being tolerated—probably because some kids had documented issues, so teachers felt they had to be tolerated. But my son would complain about not being able to get the teacher’s attention because other kids were taking all of it. That’s not catastrophic, and I told him to roll with it, but over time I could see it making him more cynical about school.

And while I don’t think my kids suffered academically, I do think they were learning to coast—which can really come back to bite them later. When expectations are low and the work doesn’t push them, they start thinking “good enough” is fine, and that’s a hard mindset to break in the upper grades.

On top of that, we rarely got homework back with any meaningful feedback or red marks. Even if kids are testing well, they’re missing out on the kind of academic discipline they’ll need later. So between the classroom culture and the lack of rigor in day-to-day work, we decided to make a change.

Academics at TR were like the proverbial frog boiling in a pot of water. You didn't know there was an issue until it was too late. MAP scores said everything was fine because if your kid is on the higher performing end, of course they were. My kid was basically made into a teacher's helper being tasked with supporting other kids or working "independently" (i.e. allowing the teachers to spend time with kids with higher needs). They never got real homework. They never learned how to study. They were never challenged. Middle and upper grades were no different than ECE, and that is where TR failed.

For me the breaking point was when we attended a teacher meeting and MAP scores and all standardized tests were all top of range but report cards were 4s (and not 5s). Turns out that was because none of the TR materials tested understanding to a 5 so there was no way for a kid to get a 5. This was by design. They were teaching to borderline proficiency. They weren't testing anything above grade level. I walked out of that meeting and said to my spouse, "We are getting the eff out of here next year!"

We also had behavioral issue concerns. Similar to TR's inability to shift from an ECE to academic mindset, they were also ill equipped to deal with behavioral issues as pre-puberty and puberty set in. Teachers lost control of classrooms. Admins' first response was to come down on teachers who tried to create structure. Perpetrators of physical violence were treated like the victims. Teachers and parents were asked to worry about the poor child who acted out and hit or threw chairs and were subtly accused of racism or classism if they cared more about their kid getting hit by a chair than the kid who threw it. We escaped in 5th (thank the lord) but I have no doubt the MS behavioral issues that are widely reported (they actually staggered the return to school after December break 2 years ago to try and get a handle on out of control kids) are an extension of TR's treating MS kids like ECE kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White family here who left after 2nd and wish we'd left sooner. I'd say we probably fall in the category of the families who were "less concerned" about the perceived academic issues. We did not think there were serious behavioral issues but it became clear at the beginning of 2nd grade (and if I'm honest with myself, towards the end of 1st) that our daughter was not learning what she needed to learn. We switched to DCPS for 3rd and are also much happier.

Black parent here. Looking strictly through the narrow lens of MAP scores, my kids were doing great—fantastic, even—but I honestly attribute that almost entirely to what we were doing outside of school, especially with math enrichment, not to what was happening day-to-day in the classroom.

I also did experience some behavioral issues, particularly with my older child’s cohort. Some of it was just a lack of seriousness in the room and certain behaviors being tolerated—probably because some kids had documented issues, so teachers felt they had to be tolerated. But my son would complain about not being able to get the teacher’s attention because other kids were taking all of it. That’s not catastrophic, and I told him to roll with it, but over time I could see it making him more cynical about school.

And while I don’t think my kids suffered academically, I do think they were learning to coast—which can really come back to bite them later. When expectations are low and the work doesn’t push them, they start thinking “good enough” is fine, and that’s a hard mindset to break in the upper grades.

On top of that, we rarely got homework back with any meaningful feedback or red marks. Even if kids are testing well, they’re missing out on the kind of academic discipline they’ll need later. So between the classroom culture and the lack of rigor in day-to-day work, we decided to make a change.

Academics at TR were like the proverbial frog boiling in a pot of water. You didn't know there was an issue until it was too late. MAP scores said everything was fine because if your kid is on the higher performing end, of course they were. My kid was basically made into a teacher's helper being tasked with supporting other kids or working "independently" (i.e. allowing the teachers to spend time with kids with higher needs). They never got real homework. They never learned how to study. They were never challenged. Middle and upper grades were no different than ECE, and that is where TR failed.

For me the breaking point was when we attended a teacher meeting and MAP scores and all standardized tests were all top of range but report cards were 4s (and not 5s). Turns out that was because none of the TR materials tested understanding to a 5 so there was no way for a kid to get a 5. This was by design. They were teaching to borderline proficiency. They weren't testing anything above grade level. I walked out of that meeting and said to my spouse, "We are getting the eff out of here next year!"

We also had behavioral issue concerns. Similar to TR's inability to shift from an ECE to academic mindset, they were also ill equipped to deal with behavioral issues as pre-puberty and puberty set in. Teachers lost control of classrooms. Admins' first response was to come down on teachers who tried to create structure. Perpetrators of physical violence were treated like the victims. Teachers and parents were asked to worry about the poor child who acted out and hit or threw chairs and were subtly accused of racism or classism if they cared more about their kid getting hit by a chair than the kid who threw it. We escaped in 5th (thank the lord) but I have no doubt the MS behavioral issues that are widely reported (they actually staggered the return to school after December break 2 years ago to try and get a handle on out of control kids) are an extension of TR's treating MS kids like ECE kids.

Yes - at some point a year or two ago, TR made explicit that they were not doing any Tier 1 grade level instruction and so formally abandoned the “5” as the top mark on progress reports, with 4 (i.e., excels at grade level) being the highest possible score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White family here who left after 2nd and wish we'd left sooner. I'd say we probably fall in the category of the families who were "less concerned" about the perceived academic issues. We did not think there were serious behavioral issues but it became clear at the beginning of 2nd grade (and if I'm honest with myself, towards the end of 1st) that our daughter was not learning what she needed to learn. We switched to DCPS for 3rd and are also much happier.

Black parent here. Looking strictly through the narrow lens of MAP scores, my kids were doing great—fantastic, even—but I honestly attribute that almost entirely to what we were doing outside of school, especially with math enrichment, not to what was happening day-to-day in the classroom.

I also did experience some behavioral issues, particularly with my older child’s cohort. Some of it was just a lack of seriousness in the room and certain behaviors being tolerated—probably because some kids had documented issues, so teachers felt they had to be tolerated. But my son would complain about not being able to get the teacher’s attention because other kids were taking all of it. That’s not catastrophic, and I told him to roll with it, but over time I could see it making him more cynical about school.

And while I don’t think my kids suffered academically, I do think they were learning to coast—which can really come back to bite them later. When expectations are low and the work doesn’t push them, they start thinking “good enough” is fine, and that’s a hard mindset to break in the upper grades.

On top of that, we rarely got homework back with any meaningful feedback or red marks. Even if kids are testing well, they’re missing out on the kind of academic discipline they’ll need later. So between the classroom culture and the lack of rigor in day-to-day work, we decided to make a change.

Academics at TR were like the proverbial frog boiling in a pot of water. You didn't know there was an issue until it was too late. MAP scores said everything was fine because if your kid is on the higher performing end, of course they were. My kid was basically made into a teacher's helper being tasked with supporting other kids or working "independently" (i.e. allowing the teachers to spend time with kids with higher needs). They never got real homework. They never learned how to study. They were never challenged. Middle and upper grades were no different than ECE, and that is where TR failed.

For me the breaking point was when we attended a teacher meeting and MAP scores and all standardized tests were all top of range but report cards were 4s (and not 5s). Turns out that was because none of the TR materials tested understanding to a 5 so there was no way for a kid to get a 5. This was by design. They were teaching to borderline proficiency. They weren't testing anything above grade level. I walked out of that meeting and said to my spouse, "We are getting the eff out of here next year!"

We also had behavioral issue concerns. Similar to TR's inability to shift from an ECE to academic mindset, they were also ill equipped to deal with behavioral issues as pre-puberty and puberty set in. Teachers lost control of classrooms. Admins' first response was to come down on teachers who tried to create structure. Perpetrators of physical violence were treated like the victims. Teachers and parents were asked to worry about the poor child who acted out and hit or threw chairs and were subtly accused of racism or classism if they cared more about their kid getting hit by a chair than the kid who threw it. We escaped in 5th (thank the lord) but I have no doubt the MS behavioral issues that are widely reported (they actually staggered the return to school after December break 2 years ago to try and get a handle on out of control kids) are an extension of TR's treating MS kids like ECE kids.

Yes - at some point a year or two ago, TR made explicit that they were not doing any Tier 1 grade level instruction and so formally abandoned the “5” as the top mark on progress reports, with 4 (i.e., excels at grade level) being the highest possible score.

*TR made explicit that they were not doing any Tier 1 ABOVE grade level instruction

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White family here who left after 2nd and wish we'd left sooner. I'd say we probably fall in the category of the families who were "less concerned" about the perceived academic issues. We did not think there were serious behavioral issues but it became clear at the beginning of 2nd grade (and if I'm honest with myself, towards the end of 1st) that our daughter was not learning what she needed to learn. We switched to DCPS for 3rd and are also much happier.

Black parent here. Looking strictly through the narrow lens of MAP scores, my kids were doing great—fantastic, even—but I honestly attribute that almost entirely to what we were doing outside of school, especially with math enrichment, not to what was happening day-to-day in the classroom.

I also did experience some behavioral issues, particularly with my older child’s cohort. Some of it was just a lack of seriousness in the room and certain behaviors being tolerated—probably because some kids had documented issues, so teachers felt they had to be tolerated. But my son would complain about not being able to get the teacher’s attention because other kids were taking all of it. That’s not catastrophic, and I told him to roll with it, but over time I could see it making him more cynical about school.

And while I don’t think my kids suffered academically, I do think they were learning to coast—which can really come back to bite them later. When expectations are low and the work doesn’t push them, they start thinking “good enough” is fine, and that’s a hard mindset to break in the upper grades.

On top of that, we rarely got homework back with any meaningful feedback or red marks. Even if kids are testing well, they’re missing out on the kind of academic discipline they’ll need later. So between the classroom culture and the lack of rigor in day-to-day work, we decided to make a change.

Academics at TR were like the proverbial frog boiling in a pot of water. You didn't know there was an issue until it was too late. MAP scores said everything was fine because if your kid is on the higher performing end, of course they were. My kid was basically made into a teacher's helper being tasked with supporting other kids or working "independently" (i.e. allowing the teachers to spend time with kids with higher needs). They never got real homework. They never learned how to study. They were never challenged. Middle and upper grades were no different than ECE, and that is where TR failed.

For me the breaking point was when we attended a teacher meeting and MAP scores and all standardized tests were all top of range but report cards were 4s (and not 5s). Turns out that was because none of the TR materials tested understanding to a 5 so there was no way for a kid to get a 5. This was by design. They were teaching to borderline proficiency. They weren't testing anything above grade level. I walked out of that meeting and said to my spouse, "We are getting the eff out of here next year!"

We also had behavioral issue concerns. Similar to TR's inability to shift from an ECE to academic mindset, they were also ill equipped to deal with behavioral issues as pre-puberty and puberty set in. Teachers lost control of classrooms. Admins' first response was to come down on teachers who tried to create structure. Perpetrators of physical violence were treated like the victims. Teachers and parents were asked to worry about the poor child who acted out and hit or threw chairs and were subtly accused of racism or classism if they cared more about their kid getting hit by a chair than the kid who threw it. We escaped in 5th (thank the lord) but I have no doubt the MS behavioral issues that are widely reported (they actually staggered the return to school after December break 2 years ago to try and get a handle on out of control kids) are an extension of TR's treating MS kids like ECE kids.

Yes - at some point a year or two ago, TR made explicit that they were not doing any Tier 1 grade level instruction and so formally abandoned the “5” as the top mark on progress reports, with 4 (i.e., excels at grade level) being the highest possible score.

*TR made explicit that they were not doing any Tier 1 ABOVE grade level instruction

I mean, I guess it is good that they said the quiet part out loud. But JFC! How is this school going to continue to enroll any UMC kids? If they stop drawing those kids their built in demographic advantages will fade. Which has TR serving an increasingly high risk population. Something they have failed at for years.

Define: Death Spiral

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White family here who left after 2nd and wish we'd left sooner. I'd say we probably fall in the category of the families who were "less concerned" about the perceived academic issues. We did not think there were serious behavioral issues but it became clear at the beginning of 2nd grade (and if I'm honest with myself, towards the end of 1st) that our daughter was not learning what she needed to learn. We switched to DCPS for 3rd and are also much happier.

Black parent here. Looking strictly through the narrow lens of MAP scores, my kids were doing great—fantastic, even—but I honestly attribute that almost entirely to what we were doing outside of school, especially with math enrichment, not to what was happening day-to-day in the classroom.

I also did experience some behavioral issues, particularly with my older child’s cohort. Some of it was just a lack of seriousness in the room and certain behaviors being tolerated—probably because some kids had documented issues, so teachers felt they had to be tolerated. But my son would complain about not being able to get the teacher’s attention because other kids were taking all of it. That’s not catastrophic, and I told him to roll with it, but over time I could see it making him more cynical about school.

And while I don’t think my kids suffered academically, I do think they were learning to coast—which can really come back to bite them later. When expectations are low and the work doesn’t push them, they start thinking “good enough” is fine, and that’s a hard mindset to break in the upper grades.

On top of that, we rarely got homework back with any meaningful feedback or red marks. Even if kids are testing well, they’re missing out on the kind of academic discipline they’ll need later. So between the classroom culture and the lack of rigor in day-to-day work, we decided to make a change.

Academics at TR were like the proverbial frog boiling in a pot of water. You didn't know there was an issue until it was too late. MAP scores said everything was fine because if your kid is on the higher performing end, of course they were. My kid was basically made into a teacher's helper being tasked with supporting other kids or working "independently" (i.e. allowing the teachers to spend time with kids with higher needs). They never got real homework. They never learned how to study. They were never challenged. Middle and upper grades were no different than ECE, and that is where TR failed.

For me the breaking point was when we attended a teacher meeting and MAP scores and all standardized tests were all top of range but report cards were 4s (and not 5s). Turns out that was because none of the TR materials tested understanding to a 5 so there was no way for a kid to get a 5. This was by design. They were teaching to borderline proficiency. They weren't testing anything above grade level. I walked out of that meeting and said to my spouse, "We are getting the eff out of here next year!"

We also had behavioral issue concerns. Similar to TR's inability to shift from an ECE to academic mindset, they were also ill equipped to deal with behavioral issues as pre-puberty and puberty set in. Teachers lost control of classrooms. Admins' first response was to come down on teachers who tried to create structure. Perpetrators of physical violence were treated like the victims. Teachers and parents were asked to worry about the poor child who acted out and hit or threw chairs and were subtly accused of racism or classism if they cared more about their kid getting hit by a chair than the kid who threw it. We escaped in 5th (thank the lord) but I have no doubt the MS behavioral issues that are widely reported (they actually staggered the return to school after December break 2 years ago to try and get a handle on out of control kids) are an extension of TR's treating MS kids like ECE kids.

Yes - at some point a year or two ago, TR made explicit that they were not doing any Tier 1 grade level instruction and so formally abandoned the “5” as the top mark on progress reports, with 4 (i.e., excels at grade level) being the highest possible score.

*TR made explicit that they were not doing any Tier 1 ABOVE grade level instruction

I mean, I guess it is good that they said the quiet part out loud. But JFC! How is this school going to continue to enroll any UMC kids? If they stop drawing those kids their built in demographic advantages will fade. Which has TR serving an increasingly high risk population. Something they have failed at for years.

Define: Death Spiral

It’s really too bad…but I did appreciate them being up front about it.