WCP article on Watkins

[Anonymous]

Well, I guess Grover Norquist does post on DCUM. I guess he and his tax pledge are irrelevant now, so messing up DCPS is a prime target.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I guess Grover Norquist does post on DCUM. I guess he and his tax pledge are irrelevant now, so messing up DCPS is a prime target.

I just find it SO fascinating that he sends his kids to DCPS. I guess he uses plenty of tax-funded infrastructure as well, but it's just kind of funny to think of him getting to the point where he says to himself, "Hmm, what can we do to fund gifted programs at DCPS???"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I guess Grover Norquist does post on DCUM. I guess he and his tax pledge are irrelevant now, so messing up DCPS is a prime target.

Really doubt Grover Norquist posts on DCUM but could see his wife doing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article doesn't touch on the crux of the issue. Several other Cap Hill neighborhood schools now support majority in-bound populations, or will shortly - Brent, Maury, SWS (mostly Hill, was mostly IB before they got the Goding building) and Ludlow-Taylor coming up. But Watkins doesn't attract nearly as many kids from the Cluster district as it could and, arguably, should. The school is only around one-quarter in-bound, much less than it was a decade ago, when it reached a high of over 40% IB and white. The main problem is that high SES Watkins parents commonly bail after 2nd or 3rd grade, including for Ludlow these days. Principal Bell doesn't sound like the best choice for the school - if she can't please her district's well-heeled parents, she won't survive in a city where upper middle-class parents commonly buy very expensive homes to gain access to high-performing schools. The Watkins IB parents feel left behind as a group. They know that their star is not rising relative to nearby programs (despite endless claims to the contrary on these boards, and around the hood) and many ultimately wish they'd bought real property in another Hill ES school district. The school has been troubled year in and year out since the Montessori and SWS programs found their own homes. These were the programs most of the neighborhood parents went for, and celebrated. The fancy renovation may not make much difference come August.

me me me me me me me

Is what I hear.

Principal Bell's job is to educate the 436 students who enrolled in her school, period. Not catering or managing the egos of the wealthiest parents.

Providing extra support to those students who need it to get to grade level is what she is supposed to do, and we should be thanking her. Otherwise they will wind up in the Ward 6 middle schools doing 2nd or 3rd grade work..

Has she actually removed advanced instruction for anyone or taken anything away from the students who are at or above grade level?

Has she actually put anything in place for advanced learners or is she falling back on the fiction of classroom differentiation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

so you're comparing a HIGH SCHOOL curriculum with an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL curriculum? That's ridiculous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

so you're comparing a HIGH SCHOOL curriculum with an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL curriculum? That's ridiculous

or you could look at the obvious -- the highest performing students are going to perform with or without the lower performing students keeping up. They won't get pushed like the TJHSST students but they aren't going to regress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article doesn't touch on the crux of the issue. Several other Cap Hill neighborhood schools now support majority in-bound populations, or will shortly - Brent, Maury, SWS (mostly Hill, was mostly IB before they got the Goding building) and Ludlow-Taylor coming up. But Watkins doesn't attract nearly as many kids from the Cluster district as it could and, arguably, should. The school is only around one-quarter in-bound, much less than it was a decade ago, when it reached a high of over 40% IB and white. The main problem is that high SES Watkins parents commonly bail after 2nd or 3rd grade, including for Ludlow these days. Principal Bell doesn't sound like the best choice for the school - if she can't please her district's well-heeled parents, she won't survive in a city where upper middle-class parents commonly buy very expensive homes to gain access to high-performing schools. The Watkins IB parents feel left behind as a group. They know that their star is not rising relative to nearby programs (despite endless claims to the contrary on these boards, and around the hood) and many ultimately wish they'd bought real property in another Hill ES school district. The school has been troubled year in and year out since the Montessori and SWS programs found their own homes. These were the programs most of the neighborhood parents went for, and celebrated. The fancy renovation may not make much difference come August.

You have no clue WTF you are talking about. LT offered 7,6 and 6 spots for 3rd, 4th and 5th and pulled only negligible numbers off the WL. I have never understood the need/desire of people like you who post utter BS. Don't you have anything better to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

so you're comparing a HIGH SCHOOL curriculum with an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL curriculum? That's ridiculous

Don't be stupid. No one said anything about curriculum. I was addressing the point made that the achievement gap is being lessened by preventing the further advancement of advanced kids. What is being done at Wilson is an example.

[Anonymous]

[list]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

so you're comparing a HIGH SCHOOL curriculum with an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL curriculum? That's ridiculous

Don't be stupid. No one said anything about curriculum. I was addressing the point made that the achievement gap is being lessened by preventing the further advancement of advanced kids. What is being done at Wilson is an example.

Christ! you want to talk about stupid? You made an asinine point comparing class composition at Wilson to Watkins which is an apples to boot heels comparison. Total non-sequitur and BS conspiracy blather

[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:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

so you're comparing a HIGH SCHOOL curriculum with an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL curriculum? That's ridiculous

Don't be stupid. No one said anything about curriculum. I was addressing the point made that the achievement gap is being lessened by preventing the further advancement of advanced kids. What is being done at Wilson is an example.

Yeah, if you actually believe this insane theory, I don't know what to say to you.

[Anonymous]

New Stuart Hobson principal is Kristofer Comeforo. Formerly AP at Cardozo and standout science teacher at Anacostia

[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:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

so you're comparing a HIGH SCHOOL curriculum with an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL curriculum? That's ridiculous

or you could look at the obvious -- the highest performing students are going to perform with or without the lower performing students keeping up. They won't get pushed like the TJHSST students but they aren't going to regress.

I don't fault Watkins parents for wanting to raise the bar above "not regressing."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

At the end of a community meeting a few month ago on the achievement gap, Principal Bell very explicitly said that teachers were going to be focusing on bringing up the kids who were behind, and that would mean less time for the kids who were doing OK. I appreciated the honesty. (Anyone else who was at the meeting, please chime in to share your memory and interpretation.) My kids are doing pretty well, but yes, they are bored at times. Still, they are progressing, and I understand that they will do fine either way. Parents whose kids finished up at Watkins a few years ago said that their kids learned very little in 5th grade because there were few academic peers. That's becoming less of a problem as more on/above grade students are staying on, which makes a huge difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I sense [detractors] think that somehow those [achievement gap] efforts harm the outcomes for white students or other students,” says one parent who supports Bell. “Maybe they think if you’re focusing efforts on the achievement gap, you can’t achieve for all students.”

I think that this is a real concern. Do Watkins families feel that children doing above grade level work are pushed to reach even farther? That is not the sense I have come away with after speaking with Watkins parents.

Do Watkins family think their kids are MORE important than some other Watkins family kids? The reasonable, community-minded approach would be to work to serve both sets of students, particularly since you chose to live in a city and neighborhood that you know is beset by income inequality. Not to take over the school for your own personal benefit.l

No, but they certainly think their children are equally important.

By the way the Watkins neighborhood is not beset with income equality. The income equality comes from OOB. Doesn't make the kids any less important, but you should get your facts right.

The idea that the UMC kids at Watkins are somehow being harmed by attempts to address income inequality is just ludicrous.

When the attitude of some teachers is that your child is already ahead and therefore it doesn't matter if they make progress during the year, then yes, they are being harmed.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case. Even if it is, sounds like it's one bad teacher -- and also that there's no evidence that NOT helping the kids at the bottom would help the kids at the top.

Preventing (or at least, not encouraging) the further advancement of the advanced kids will help reduce the achievement gap. Helping the advanced kids excel increases the gap. It's not "ludicrous," it's common sense.

That sounds like a really intense conspiracy theory, and I seriously doubt it's true.

the school isn't the reason advanced kids are advanced and conversely they can't them back academically. This is just stupid tin foil hat trolling from PP

np here. I don't think this is so far off the mark. Look at what is happening at Wilson next year with the Principal putting all students, regardless of ability, in honors classes. I think DCPS understands that it is next to impossible to meaningfully raise the scores of low performing students without serious, costly social interventions. So, lets make that achievement gap lessen by slowing the propulsion of higher performing students. You really think an "honors" class that has students both below and above grade level is going to serve higher performing students? How much more advanced will they really become when the teacher spends the majority of her/his time trying to get students several grades behind just to grade level? I am all for helping these students but suspect DCPS has decided to do it at the expense of high performing students.

At the end of a community meeting a few month ago on the achievement gap, Principal Bell very explicitly said that teachers were going to be focusing on bringing up the kids who were behind, and that would mean less time for the kids who were doing OK. I appreciated the honesty. (Anyone else who was at the meeting, please chime in to share your memory and interpretation.) My kids are doing pretty well, but yes, they are bored at times. Still, they are progressing, and I understand that they will do fine either way. Parents whose kids finished up at Watkins a few years ago said that their kids learned very little in 5th grade because there were few academic peers. That's becoming less of a problem as more on/above grade students are staying on, which makes a huge difference.

I hope all the trolls who are giving parents with advanced kids a bunch of crap will STFU after this post.