Moving to Capitol Hill/2017 PARCC scores

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know of a couple of "Brent families" who have kids at SH, none of whom live IB for Brent. One of the families did in fact move a couple of blocks from the Brent district to the Cluster district. So can we stop pretending there are more than a few "Brent" kids at SH?

+1. I know OOB Brent families who live in Cluster boundary, lotteried to Brent for ES, and enrolled at SH.

But none of those families would count in the OOB percentage at SH anyway, so this conversation is pointless.

Why not? They're out of boundary.

?? If they're in the Cluster boundary, they are in-boundary for SH.

[Anonymous]

Gentrifiers were rolling in way before Maury lost Title 1. Much of the Cluster boundary has been gentrified for years. They just chose not to send their kids into the Cluster schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know of a couple of "Brent families" who have kids at SH, none of whom live IB for Brent. One of the families did in fact move a couple of blocks from the Brent district to the Cluster district. So can we stop pretending there are more than a few "Brent" kids at SH?

+1. I know OOB Brent families who live in Cluster boundary, lotteried to Brent for ES, and enrolled at SH.

But none of those families would count in the OOB percentage at SH anyway, so this conversation is pointless.

Why not? They're out of boundary.

?? If they're in the Cluster boundary, they are in-boundary for SH.

Oh right, duh. But I guess they're just "Brent" families and not Brent families since they are OOB for Brent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP,
You should really think about buying in the Capitol Riverfront. Van Ness Elementary School is the next Brent in Ward 6.

VN = Harvard on the Anacostia

Van Ness is actually a very run well school. The staff and leadership is top notch. There are some very bright kids that go to Van Ness. Next year will be the first year that Van Ness kids will be tested, and it wouldn't surprise me if their scores are similar to Maury and Ludlow-Taylor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gentrifiers were rolling in way before Maury lost Title 1. Much of the Cluster boundary has been gentrified for years. They just chose not to send their kids into the Cluster schools.

Not exactly. It took six or seven years of heavy gentrifier enrollment in ECE and the lower grades at Maury before the school lost Title 1. You didn't see many high SES or white kids in the upper grades at Maury until Title 1 went, two years ago.

Proportionally, there were a lot more gentrifiers in the Cluster a decade ago. In those days, SWS was still at Peabody, the CH Montessori was still at Watkins, 5th grade was still at Stuart Hobson, Brent and Maury attracted few high SES families, and the high SES-friendly charters in NE (particularly IT, YY and MV) hadn't opened yet, other than 2 Rivers. Watkins had double the percentage of high SES/white kids ten years back as they have now (40% vs. 20%). Looks like they're poised to finally start to recover the lost 20% after their snazzy renovation.

Once a school sheds Title 1 status, a certain stigma is lifted and more high SES families come on board steadily. Every time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gentrifiers were rolling in way before Maury lost Title 1. Much of the Cluster boundary has been gentrified for years. They just chose not to send their kids into the Cluster schools.

Not exactly. It took six or seven years of heavy gentrifier enrollment in ECE and the lower grades at Maury before the school lost Title 1. You didn't see many high SES or white kids in the upper grades at Maury until Title 1 went, two years ago.

Proportionally, there were a lot more gentrifiers in the Cluster a decade ago. In those days, SWS was still at Peabody, the CH Montessori was still at Watkins, 5th grade was still at Stuart Hobson, Brent and Maury attracted few high SES families, and the high SES-friendly charters in NE (particularly IT, YY and MV) hadn't opened yet, other than 2 Rivers. Watkins had double the percentage of high SES/white kids ten years back as they have now (40% vs. 20%). Looks like they're poised to finally start to recover the lost 20% after their snazzy renovation.

Once a school sheds Title 1 status, a certain stigma is lifted and more high SES families come on board steadily. Every time.

"certain stigma." well, at least we're getting more accurate and honest in our language.

[Anonymous]

That's the reality, the way change comes to Hill schools. Many high SES parents (of various races) won't touch a Title 1 school.

It's great that you're more open-minded than others but no need to lord it over us.

[Anonymous]

On another thread, somebody posted this link which is great (it does have a few flaws like showing SWS as a charter and somehow losing BASIS from MS, etc) - http://www.empowerk12.org/parcc-schools.html

Based on that site:

Combined ELA/Math 4+ scores ratings for all students

SWS
Brent
Maury
Ludlow-Taylor
Watkins

Combined ELA/Math 4+ scores for Black/African Americans

Ludlow-Taylor
CHML
Watkins
JO Wilson
Brent
(Not enough testing kids in SWS)

Combined ELA/Math 4+ scores for White/Caucasian

Maury
Watkins
SWS
Brent
(Not enough testing kids in Ludlow-Taylor)

Combined ELA/Math 4+ scores for At-Risk

Ludlow-Taylor
JO Wilson
Payne
Watkins
Tyler
Miner
(Not enough testing kids in Brent, Maury, SWS)

[Anonymous]

Right, but many of us on the Hill care little about PARCC test scores, or not at all.

Parents tend to feign interest in test scores in the hopes of avoiding accusations of racism and classicism in their choice of school, when they really care about other things - changing demographics, strong teaching and leadership, a stable faculty, good facilities (particularly a playground, performance space and library), manageable class sizes, fun to be had for the kids, a welcoming school community, a robust PTA raising a lot of money etc.

We don't need silly test scores to tell us about upper middle-class experiences vs. low-income experiences in an urban setting.

[Anonymous]

low SES blacks kids have behavior issues and take away from the education experience period

That's why normal people including blacks with means avoid certain schools with certain populations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That's the reality, the way change comes to Hill schools. Many high SES parents (of various races) won't touch a Title 1 school.

It's great that you're more open-minded than others but no need to lord it over us.

It's not being open minded. It's being a bare minimum of aware of your surroundings and non-hypocritical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Right, but many of us on the Hill care little about PARCC test scores, or not at all.

Parents tend to feign interest in test scores in the hopes of avoiding accusations of racism and classicism in their choice of school, when they really care about other things - changing demographics, strong teaching and leadership, a stable faculty, good facilities (particularly a playground, performance space and library), manageable class sizes, fun to be had for the kids, a welcoming school community, a robust PTA raising a lot of money etc.

We don't need silly test scores to tell us about upper middle-class experiences vs. low-income experiences in an urban setting.

Speak for yourself. A school that manages to close the race/income gap is important to me. Plus there are plenty of schools with lovely facilities, great teachers, that DCUM would not touch with a 10-ft poll. In that I agree with you that PARCC is not relevant because those schools actually have good PARCC scores. PS you're rich, not UMC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:low SES blacks kids have behavior issues and take away from the education experience period

That's why normal people including blacks with means avoid certain schools with certain populations

Ok, have fun in Manasass. I wish I could cross-reference your other no doubt odious DCUM posts on race, so that the white DCUM parents who think they're being cute by talking about "the opportunities presented by changing demographics" actually realize with whom they are associating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right, but many of us on the Hill care little about PARCC test scores, or not at all.

Parents tend to feign interest in test scores in the hopes of avoiding accusations of racism and classicism in their choice of school, when they really care about other things - changing demographics, strong teaching and leadership, a stable faculty, good facilities (particularly a playground, performance space and library), manageable class sizes, fun to be had for the kids, a welcoming school community, a robust PTA raising a lot of money etc.

We don't need silly test scores to tell us about upper middle-class experiences vs. low-income experiences in an urban setting.

Speak for yourself. A school that manages to close the race/income gap is important to me. Plus there are plenty of schools with lovely facilities, great teachers, that DCUM would not touch with a 10-ft poll. In that I agree with you that PARCC is not relevant because those schools actually have good PARCC scores. PS you're rich, not UMC.

Right, rich, with our non-profit jobs. How old are your kids, 3, 4, 5? Talk to me after a few years in the elementary grades at a Title 1 school, or 6 or 7 years in any DCPS. I can practically guarantee that you will no longer preaching the gospel of closing the race/income gap, with your own children as one of the primary tools, particularly if your kids are ELA gifted or fully bilingual.

[Anonymous]

CLOSE the race/income gap? In the same category as growing crops on the moon.

The most cost-effective approach to narrowing the gap is to keep high SES kids from excelling in schools with many low SES kids. An old trick in DCPS.