Can anyone tell me the story of Stuart-Hobson?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks who buy houses and disregard publicly available school data -- and are then angry or shocked by their lack of 'options' as middle school approaches get no sympathy from me.

If only things were that simple.

When we bought in-boundary for the Cluster a decade ago, the data on SH seemed promising for this expectant mother.

But then, whoops...

SWS and Logan suddenly got their own buildings and left.
Maury and Brent attracted more high SES families than Watkins.
Watkins' planned renovation took many years longer than expected.
A bunch of charters sprang up (mainly language immersion programs, but also BASIS and ITS) that creamed off a big chunk of the supposedly Watkins and SH bound families.
SH added Ludlow and JO Wilson as feeders. Neither has attracted many high SES families to the upper grades.

We're not asking for sympathy, but you might want to think twice before judging us for changing our minds about the Cluster.

Signed
Parent somewhat surprised and very disappointed that SH is still only around one quarter IB a decade on.

same old shifting sands in dcps problem

Exactly. It's a big system, and the fundamental challenges have not changed. In ten years the city has gone from 80% public school students in poverty or at risk, to 70% in poverty or at risk which is the root problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You seriously don't know the basics after perusing SH threads?

During the 2013-2014 school boundaries and feeders review, school system leaders refused to allow most of the nine DCPS elementary schools on Cap Hill to feed into an enlarged SH, creating a pan-Ward 6 DCPS middle school. DCPS intransigence on the issue was supported by the politically powerful leadership of the Capitol Cluster, both admins and parents (mostly residents Wards 5, 7 and 8), and their allies at the the pro-Cluster Capitol Hill Public School Parents Organization (CHPSPO). Sadly, most Cap Hill parents of little kids would have cheered the change.

Without the strongest Hill DCPS elementary schools--Maury, SWS and Brent--feeding into SH, the school can't improve quickly, catching up to Hardy and possibly Deal in this generation. Ensuring that SH become a predominantly in-boundary and high SES school is now a 10-20 year project, when it could have been a 3-5 year project. Not much more to say.

Agreed. The Cluster PTA president at the time Vince Morris was not helpful at all and inhibited any progess for growing the neighborhood. School safety and school management administrative culture was not his concern. He seems buddy-buddy with Grosso, so that says it all and now here we are with dysfunctional feeder patterns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You seriously don't know the basics after perusing SH threads?

During the 2013-2014 school boundaries and feeders review, school system leaders refused to allow most of the nine DCPS elementary schools on Cap Hill to feed into an enlarged SH, creating a pan-Ward 6 DCPS middle school. DCPS intransigence on the issue was supported by the politically powerful leadership of the Capitol Cluster, both admins and parents (mostly residents Wards 5, 7 and 8), and their allies at the the pro-Cluster Capitol Hill Public School Parents Organization (CHPSPO). Sadly, most Cap Hill parents of little kids would have cheered the change.

Without the strongest Hill DCPS elementary schools--Maury, SWS and Brent--feeding into SH, the school can't improve quickly, catching up to Hardy and possibly Deal in this generation. Ensuring that SH become a predominantly in-boundary and high SES school is now a 10-20 year project, when it could have been a 3-5 year project. Not much more to say.

Agreed. The Cluster PTA president at the time Vince Morris was not helpful at all and inhibited any progess for growing the neighborhood. School safety and school management administrative culture was not his concern. He seems buddy-buddy with Grosso, so that says it all and now here we are with dysfunctional feeder patterns.

Setting aside the relative strength of the elementary schools, for me the disappointment with the school boundary review is that kids in Capitol Hill elementary schools are left with feeder rights to three different middle schools. The cluster was happy with their boundaries and did not want to change, but because their boundaries cut a diagonal across the neighborhood, the rest of the elementary schools were divided. Stuart Hobson may have the strongest middle school program, but they are in the smallest building with the least outdoor space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You seriously don't know the basics after perusing SH threads?

During the 2013-2014 school boundaries and feeders review, school system leaders refused to allow most of the nine DCPS elementary schools on Cap Hill to feed into an enlarged SH, creating a pan-Ward 6 DCPS middle school. DCPS intransigence on the issue was supported by the politically powerful leadership of the Capitol Cluster, both admins and parents (mostly residents Wards 5, 7 and 8), and their allies at the the pro-Cluster Capitol Hill Public School Parents Organization (CHPSPO). Sadly, most Cap Hill parents of little kids would have cheered the change.

Without the strongest Hill DCPS elementary schools--Maury, SWS and Brent--feeding into SH, the school can't improve quickly, catching up to Hardy and possibly Deal in this generation. Ensuring that SH become a predominantly in-boundary and high SES school is now a 10-20 year project, when it could have been a 3-5 year project. Not much more to say.

Agreed. The Cluster PTA president at the time Vince Morris was not helpful at all and inhibited any progess for growing the neighborhood. School safety and school management administrative culture was not his concern. He seems buddy-buddy with Grosso, so that says it all and now here we are with dysfunctional feeder patterns.

The pan-Hill MS concept was never concrete and not favored by DCPS to begin with. DCPS was not going to give any room for an argument to close either Jefferson or Eliot Hine by making SH the central MS.
Look at the proposals that from 2014 that are linked in the sticky at the top of this forum. The DCPS idea was and remains to strengthen each of the Ward 6 MS by reinforcing feeder patterns with a single or pair of "stronger" anchors.

On top of that, the numbers for the feeders in the pan-Hill MS wouldn't work for using SH. That is what CHPSPO argued, if I remember correctly. I'm not Vince but he expressed his position openly - as did the CHCS PTA that the Watkins/LT/JOW feed to SH is the most logical and sustainable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You seriously don't know the basics after perusing SH threads?

During the 2013-2014 school boundaries and feeders review, school system leaders refused to allow most of the nine DCPS elementary schools on Cap Hill to feed into an enlarged SH, creating a pan-Ward 6 DCPS middle school. DCPS intransigence on the issue was supported by the politically powerful leadership of the Capitol Cluster, both admins and parents (mostly residents Wards 5, 7 and 8), and their allies at the the pro-Cluster Capitol Hill Public School Parents Organization (CHPSPO). Sadly, most Cap Hill parents of little kids would have cheered the change.

Without the strongest Hill DCPS elementary schools--Maury, SWS and Brent--feeding into SH, the school can't improve quickly, catching up to Hardy and possibly Deal in this generation. Ensuring that SH become a predominantly in-boundary and high SES school is now a 10-20 year project, when it could have been a 3-5 year project. Not much more to say.

Agreed. The Cluster PTA president at the time Vince Morris was not helpful at all and inhibited any progess for growing the neighborhood. School safety and school management administrative culture was not his concern. He seems buddy-buddy with Grosso, so that says it all and now here we are with dysfunctional feeder patterns.

Setting aside the relative strength of the elementary schools, for me the disappointment with the school boundary review is that kids in Capitol Hill elementary schools are left with feeder rights to three different middle schools. The cluster was happy with their boundaries and did not want to change, but because their boundaries cut a diagonal across the neighborhood, the rest of the elementary schools were divided. Stuart Hobson may have the strongest middle school program, but they are in the smallest building with the least outdoor space.

This.

The fact is Ward 6 doesn’t need three middle schools. When comparing SH to EH and Jefferson, it is the smallest and has the least amount of outdoor space. What it does have is location, which makes it the most “Hill” of the three. I know this would have been really unpopular at the time but they should have closed SH and split the students between Jefferson and EH. Had that been done I think we would have two Hardy level MSs right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks who buy houses and disregard publicly available school data -- and are then angry or shocked by their lack of 'options' as middle school approaches get no sympathy from me.

If only things were that simple.

When we bought in-boundary for the Cluster a decade ago, the data on SH seemed promising for this expectant mother.

But then, whoops...

SWS and Logan suddenly got their own buildings and left.
Maury and Brent attracted more high SES families than Watkins.
Watkins' planned renovation took many years longer than expected.
A bunch of charters sprang up (mainly language immersion programs, but also BASIS and ITS) that creamed off a big chunk of the supposedly Watkins and SH bound families.
SH added Ludlow and JO Wilson as feeders. Neither has attracted many high SES families to the upper grades.

We're not asking for sympathy, but you might want to think twice before judging us for changing our minds about the Cluster.

Signed
Parent somewhat surprised and very disappointed that SH is still only around one quarter IB a decade on.

Please look at actual data and then get back to me.

If you look at publicly available data the # of kids peeling off by 5th is a problem most pronounced at...Brent. Maurey is also high on that list. You know what isn't? Ludlow. Also pretty low on that list is Watkins and JO. So the issue here is that Brent and Maurey families leave because they don't feel they have a path. Now that's a fair observation and concern. But what amuses me to no end is how those families conflate their lack of path with SH and its feeders' trajectories. The data doesn't lie. If you dig further into the data you will see median home prices in the SH feeder schools catchment areas have skyrocketed in the last 10 years. And the data for schools just doesn't track with your world view.

My point is....

1, You haven't "seen it all before". The demographic, enrollment and financial trends simply have not been previously seen in DC or on the Hill. Just because you and your next door neighbor keep having the same conversation doesn't make it so. Data doesn't lie.
2. You are either lying to yourself of willfully ignorant when you say things like "LT hasn't improved". % of economically disadvantaged is down. Scores are way up (at Brent levels in some cases). The 5th grade enrollment is about the same as 1st. Data doesn't lie.
3. Your reference to ITS and Basis is sad and funny. Just because you and your neighbor "know" they are better school doesn't make it so. ITS's scores lag behind LT's. In fact their scores are pretty marginal, especially when adjusted for the demographic in attendance. If you look at publicly available data on where those families live you will see that SH catchment isn't a large driver. And Basis seems to be blowing through their waitlist (compared to Latin, the other "HRCS" that begins in 5th). It is a very specific educational model that isn't for everyone, so the idea that it can replace SH or any DCPS is funny. So yet again the data doesn't match your "knowledge". Now if you prioritize white and high SES over educational outcomes then I guess you are correct. But I remain confused by those of you that cite data when it suits your needs, and when it doesn't you talk about "culture" and "feel". Data doesn't lie.
4. There is no "Cluster"!!! SH is a MS...period. LT, JO and Watkins feed in. This idea that somehow Watkins is the true feeder and LT and JO (combined enrollment 868) are interlopers is just confusing. And the frequent references to SWS and Logan being part of the cluster (or "suddenly getting their own buildings) illustrates your dated view of educational systems on the Hill.
5. You don't have to go to SH or any school. But rest assured, the fact that you and your neighbor are not attending is a loss that SH and other SH feeders can well afford to absorb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks who buy houses and disregard publicly available school data -- and are then angry or shocked by their lack of 'options' as middle school approaches get no sympathy from me.

If only things were that simple.

When we bought in-boundary for the Cluster a decade ago, the data on SH seemed promising for this expectant mother.

But then, whoops...

SWS and Logan suddenly got their own buildings and left.
Maury and Brent attracted more high SES families than Watkins.
Watkins' planned renovation took many years longer than expected.
A bunch of charters sprang up (mainly language immersion programs, but also BASIS and ITS) that creamed off a big chunk of the supposedly Watkins and SH bound families.
SH added Ludlow and JO Wilson as feeders. Neither has attracted many high SES families to the upper grades.

We're not asking for sympathy, but you might want to think twice before judging us for changing our minds about the Cluster.

Signed
Parent somewhat surprised and very disappointed that SH is still only around one quarter IB a decade on.

Please look at actual data and then get back to me.

If you look at publicly available data the # of kids peeling off by 5th is a problem most pronounced at...Brent. Maurey is also high on that list. You know what isn't? Ludlow. Also pretty low on that list is Watkins and JO. So the issue here is that Brent and Maurey families leave because they don't feel they have a path. Now that's a fair observation and concern. But what amuses me to no end is how those families conflate their lack of path with SH and its feeders' trajectories. The data doesn't lie. If you dig further into the data you will see median home prices in the SH feeder schools catchment areas have skyrocketed in the last 10 years. And the data for schools just doesn't track with your world view.

My point is....

1, You haven't "seen it all before". The demographic, enrollment and financial trends simply have not been previously seen in DC or on the Hill. Just because you and your next door neighbor keep having the same conversation doesn't make it so. Data doesn't lie.
2. You are either lying to yourself of willfully ignorant when you say things like "LT hasn't improved". % of economically disadvantaged is down. Scores are way up (at Brent levels in some cases). The 5th grade enrollment is about the same as 1st. Data doesn't lie.
3. Your reference to ITS and Basis is sad and funny. Just because you and your neighbor "know" they are better school doesn't make it so. ITS's scores lag behind LT's. In fact their scores are pretty marginal, especially when adjusted for the demographic in attendance. If you look at publicly available data on where those families live you will see that SH catchment isn't a large driver. And Basis seems to be blowing through their waitlist (compared to Latin, the other "HRCS" that begins in 5th). It is a very specific educational model that isn't for everyone, so the idea that it can replace SH or any DCPS is funny. So yet again the data doesn't match your "knowledge". Now if you prioritize white and high SES over educational outcomes then I guess you are correct. But I remain confused by those of you that cite data when it suits your needs, and when it doesn't you talk about "culture" and "feel". Data doesn't lie.
4. There is no "Cluster"!!! SH is a MS...period. LT, JO and Watkins feed in. This idea that somehow Watkins is the true feeder and LT and JO (combined enrollment 868) are interlopers is just confusing. And the frequent references to SWS and Logan being part of the cluster (or "suddenly getting their own buildings) illustrates your dated view of educational systems on the Hill.
5. You don't have to go to SH or any school. But rest assured, the fact that you and your neighbor are not attending is a loss that SH and other SH feeders can well afford to absorb.

YES!
Signed, IB white family with kids at LT and path to SH.

[Anonymous]

^^^^ Telling someone that they're expendable is unacceptable. That's not tje attitude for growing the community.

[Anonymous]

^^^^ Telling someone that they're expendable is unacceptable. That's not the attitude for growing the community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^^ Telling someone that they're expendable is unacceptable. That's not the attitude for growing the community.

DP. Sensitive much? I think the PP was telling you very honestly that SH doesn't have an under-enrollment problem. You might not like the composition of the student population but your making a different choice in fact isn't make or break for the school. Especially as she pointed out too that the SH feeders have less peel off at 5th than either Brent or Maury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^^ Telling someone that they're expendable is unacceptable. That's not the attitude for growing the community.

DP. Sensitive much? I think the PP was telling you very honestly that SH doesn't have an under-enrollment problem. You might not like the composition of the student population but your making a different choice in fact isn't make or break for the school. Especially as she pointed out too that the SH feeders have less peel off at 5th than either Brent or Maury.

I am the poster in question, and PP nailed it. I didn't say they were "expendable". I said that they were not the center of the universe and/or necessary for SH and the feeders to succeed, contrary to what they and their ilk frequently posit on DCUM.

I wonder, though, where was PPP's sense of community indignation when her ilk were firing away with falsehoods about SH and the feeders? Are those schools and communities not part of her community? I'm confused...

[Anonymous]

20-25% in-boundary for the last 15 years is what's unacceptable.

Parents' perceptions of schools are as relevant as test scores and programming. Arguably, Brent students would do better on the PARCC if the school didn't offer five specials, rather than fewer like the other Hill DCPS ES. Brent parents must like five specials (the norm in JKLM), even if they come at the expense of slightly depressed PARCC scores for the demographic.

It's also true that Brent and Maury attract and retain most IB parents through 4th grade, while Ludlow doesn't yet. The fact that Ludlow's on its 3rd principal in five years hasn't been ideal. On current trends, Ludlow will continue to come along, catching up to Maury eventually on the IB buy-in front. But pretending that most IB parents ARE sold on Ludlow for the upper grades simply because they SHOULD BE gets us nowhere.

A decade back, I thought that that most IB parents would be enrolling their 11 year olds at SH by 2018. Yet only around 1/4 of them, 1/3 tops, are doing this. Yes, the school is improving, but not nearly fast enough for most. DCPS and fellow parents can't order them to enroll, or to move to the burbs either. Parents must be incentivized to feel excited about a school to enroll and stay.

With political will, two DCPS Hill middle schools could have worked.

[Anonymous]

What does five specials have to do with PARCC scores?

[Anonymous]

A little less reading, less math, and less test prep than schools offering fewer specials. Controversial to offer 5.

[Anonymous]

IB for the Cluster and don't give a hoot about test scores.

I care about strong school leadership, high quality instruction, a caring environment, decent facilities, the fun/enrichment to be had at school and peer group (mostly high SES). Get the feeling that I'm not all that unusual around here.