Hearst Principal Resigns. Impact on School?

[Anonymous]

I think that this would kill any chance of improving Hearst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that this would kill any chance of improving Hearst.

I think this is an important message to get to the DME.

[Anonymous]

Previous comments really undermine our teachers and leadership. The fact is we already have "those" kids and they are performing well.

[Anonymous]

I doubt this because my understanding is that Hearst has a large group of AA working and middle-class parents who would not meet the at-risk qualification (welfare, food stamps, foster care and homeless). Many of these families are EOTP and attend Hearst for the Deal and Wilson feeder pattern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Previous comments really undermine our teachers and leadership. The fact is we already have "those" kids and they are performing well.

Hearst has a large OOB population but not a large at risk population--it's definitely under 30%. At risk is not the same as FARMs.

[Anonymous]

To me this seems like a piece of the proposal that really needs to get fleshed out a bit and perhaps clarified. It is worded a bit strangely, in that there is the 10% set-aside, and then also the language about 30% at risk. And it's not clear if it's school-wide or at each grade, etc., which would have very different implications. So I guess at this point it's so hard to say what the implications would be for any school, since so much is in flux and unclear (and given the rising in=bounds rate at Hearst; next year's pK class is at 60% or so).

I do think this is a very important issue for the DME to be asked to flesh out more, since this new at-risk designation and potential lottery preference (up to 30% of a school's population) does (I think) reduce options quite a bit for middle class families who don't qualify as "at risk" but yet who are looking for schooling options for their kids.

It's an issue I'm going to bring up at the DME's meeting tomorrow night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that this would kill any chance of improving Hearst.

Whoever wrote this knows nothing about the Hearst community, let alone percentages and school choice.

If the plan to set aside 10% of seats for OOB students with an advantage going to high risk students actually goes through, then our 10% is no different than any other school. At risk students would go through the lottery and list their top choices like everyone else. Unless they all pick Hearst as a first choice (which is highly unlikely), we wouldn't receive a higher percentage of "at risk" students than any other school. Hearst has a growing IB population and continues to be a popular OOB school for mid-high SES families who live EOTP--both AA and White. Those families will continue to select Hearst as a first choice lottery option. At risk kids will have an advantage over these families IF they list Hearst as their "first choice" school. DCPS isn't going to place at risk kids at schools arbitrarily. Not every family wants their kid to trek across the city and if DCPS just put kids in any open seat, that would go against a family's right to choose what they view as best for their child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To me this seems like a piece of the proposal that really needs to get fleshed out a bit and perhaps clarified. It is worded a bit strangely, in that there is the 10% set-aside, and then also the language about 30% at risk. And it's not clear if it's school-wide or at each grade, etc., which would have very different implications. So I guess at this point it's so hard to say what the implications would be for any school, since so much is in flux and unclear (and given the rising in=bounds rate at Hearst; next year's pK class is at 60% or so).

I do think this is a very important issue for the DME to be asked to flesh out more, since this new at-risk designation and potential lottery preference (up to 30% of a school's population) does (I think) reduce options quite a bit for middle class families who don't qualify as "at risk" but yet who are looking for schooling options for their kids.

It's an issue I'm going to bring up at the DME's meeting tomorrow night.

Last night, they clarified that it was school-wide, not by grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at the new OOB preference proposed by the DME prioritizing at-risk kids (homeless, foster children) over all other OOB boundary children in lottery.

Would this proposal significantly increase the number of at-risk kids attending Hearst and crowd out all middle-class OOB families.

Seems like the implications of this policy could be far reaching for Hearst. Can someone explain?

Hearst is definitely on the list of schools that has to give priority in the lottery to at risk students. So while the number of OOB students may remain the same, they are more likely to be the lowest income students (homeless, in foster care, on welfare or getting food stamps).

Isn't DC already doing this because of the No Child Left Behind Act? Or if a student is at an underperforming school, they have an option to enroll elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I doubt this because my understanding is that Hearst has a large group of AA working and middle-class parents who would not meet the at-risk qualification (welfare, food stamps, foster care and homeless). Many of these families are EOTP and attend Hearst for the Deal and Wilson feeder pattern.

This is/was our family when we atteneded Hearst. Our DD just gradutaed from Deal yesterday and moving on to Wilson.

[Anonymous]

^ excuse my typos....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at the new OOB preference proposed by the DME prioritizing at-risk kids (homeless, foster children) over all other OOB boundary children in lottery.

Would this proposal significantly increase the number of at-risk kids attending Hearst and crowd out all middle-class OOB families.

Seems like the implications of this policy could be far reaching for Hearst. Can someone explain?

Hearst is definitely on the list of schools that has to give priority in the lottery to at risk students. So while the number of OOB students may remain the same, they are more likely to be the lowest income students (homeless, in foster care, on welfare or getting food stamps).

Isn't DC already doing this because of the No Child Left Behind Act? Or if a student is at an underperforming school, they have an option to enroll elsewhere.

No. They for a waiver and haven't done it for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at the new OOB preference proposed by the DME prioritizing at-risk kids (homeless, foster children) over all other OOB boundary children in lottery.

Would this proposal significantly increase the number of at-risk kids attending Hearst and crowd out all middle-class OOB families.

Seems like the implications of this policy could be far reaching for Hearst. Can someone explain?

Hearst is definitely on the list of schools that has to give priority in the lottery to at risk students. So while the number of OOB students may remain the same, they are more likely to be the lowest income students (homeless, in foster care, on welfare or getting food stamps).

Isn't DC already doing this because of the No Child Left Behind Act? Or if a student is at an underperforming school, they have an option to enroll elsewhere.

No. They for a waiver and haven't done it for years.

That should read "they got a waiver"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at the new OOB preference proposed by the DME prioritizing at-risk kids (homeless, foster children) over all other OOB boundary children in lottery.

Would this proposal significantly increase the number of at-risk kids attending Hearst and crowd out all middle-class OOB families.

Seems like the implications of this policy could be far reaching for Hearst. Can someone explain?

Hearst is definitely on the list of schools that has to give priority in the lottery to at risk students. So while the number of OOB students may remain the same, they are more likely to be the lowest income students (homeless, in foster care, on welfare or getting food stamps).

Where is this list of school that have to give priority in the lottery to at risk students? My understanding is that all schools must give priority to at risk students. Not just a select few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at the new OOB preference proposed by the DME prioritizing at-risk kids (homeless, foster children) over all other OOB boundary children in lottery.

Would this proposal significantly increase the number of at-risk kids attending Hearst and crowd out all middle-class OOB families.

Seems like the implications of this policy could be far reaching for Hearst. Can someone explain?

Hearst is definitely on the list of schools that has to give priority in the lottery to at risk students. So while the number of OOB students may remain the same, they are more likely to be the lowest income students (homeless, in foster care, on welfare or getting food stamps).

Where is this list of school that have to give priority in the lottery to at risk students? My understanding is that all schools must give priority to at risk students. Not just a select few.

No, only schools with less than 30% at risk students have to give it. They flashed it on the breakout session screen last night, but it was too fast for me to write them all down. Would be great if someone could get it tomorrow. Hearst is definitely in the list, though.