Latin replication pulled from PCSB agenda

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting this discussion (on the achievement gap) aside, does this mean that Latin definitely will NOT open a second campus during the 20/21 school year?

Yes, I think so. They would be hard pressed to be up and running in less than a year.

Good, the delay will almost certainly help our IB middle school, Stuart Hobson, consolidate gains made in the last two years under the surprisingly academic tracking and neighborhood-friendly new principal. He's established honors classes in half a dozen subjects, along with a transparent, flexible and fair system for admitting students to advanced classes.

With fewer IB and Hobson feeder 4th graders running off to WL for 5th, Hobson will surely pick up more high-performing kids for 6th grade in SY 20-21 than it would have if WL were able to open its second campus that year. The more momentum Hobson gains in attracting IB families, the stronger the program will be.

SH parent here and I disagree. What does that even mean? Principal is strongly invested in outcomes of all students, not just the more affluent IB ones.

How long have you been IB for the Cluster? We've been here since the mid 90s. The current Hobson principal is clearly far more "strongly invested" in outcomes for neighborhood families than any of his predecessors since the Cluster was set up in the 80s. Hurrah. We'll take it. Even so, we don't know any IB family that's rejected a WL spot for Hobson. Maybe that day is coming.

[Anonymous]

I do know at least three SH IB families who did not play the lottery this year for 5th. (We were not one of them. My child will be at Basis next year. If SH had a high school option I might have made a different choice.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting this discussion (on the achievement gap) aside, does this mean that Latin definitely will NOT open a second campus during the 20/21 school year?

Yes, I think so. They would be hard pressed to be up and running in less than a year.

Good, the delay will almost certainly help our IB middle school, Stuart Hobson, consolidate gains made in the last two years under the surprisingly academic tracking and neighborhood-friendly new principal. He's established honors classes in half a dozen subjects, along with a transparent, flexible and fair system for admitting students to advanced classes.

With fewer IB and Hobson feeder 4th graders running off to WL for 5th, Hobson will surely pick up more high-performing kids for 6th grade in SY 20-21 than it would have if WL were able to open its second campus that year. The more momentum Hobson gains in attracting IB families, the stronger the program will be.

SH parent here and I disagree. What does that even mean? Principal is strongly invested in outcomes of all students, not just the more affluent IB ones.

How long have you been IB for the Cluster? We've been here since the mid 90s. The current Hobson principal is clearly far more "strongly invested" in outcomes for neighborhood families than any of his predecessors since the Cluster was set up in the 80s. Hurrah. We'll take it. Even so, we don't know any IB family that's rejected a WL spot for Hobson. Maybe that day is coming.

DP. By the youngest leaves SH, we will have been in the Cluster for 18 years. My kids started at Peabody/SWS and onward. The PP you question is right IMHO. He sees the potential and strengths of all children and the systems that are set up for honors are transparent and encourage kids to stretch themselves, even if the kids are not "gifted" by DCUM terms. The administration is invested on meeting the needs and improving outcomes for all kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do know at least three SH IB families who did not play the lottery this year for 5th. (We were not one of them. My child will be at Basis next year. If SH had a high school option I might have made a different choice.)

We hear you. This is the dilemma UMC Hill parents who'd like to try SH face. They go for BASIS or WL over SH almost every time.

[Anonymous]

Those of you making all achievement judgment based on PARCC scores have clearly never watch teenagers take the PARCC. Schools have zero control over the effort put into the test by any kid in any grade. Ask your own kid(s) if you don't believe me. Mine is one of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting this discussion (on the achievement gap) aside, does this mean that Latin definitely will NOT open a second campus during the 20/21 school year?

Yes, I think so. They would be hard pressed to be up and running in less than a year.

Good, the delay will almost certainly help our IB middle school, Stuart Hobson, consolidate gains made in the last two years under the surprisingly academic tracking and neighborhood-friendly new principal. He's established honors classes in half a dozen subjects, along with a transparent, flexible and fair system for admitting students to advanced classes.

With fewer IB and Hobson feeder 4th graders running off to WL for 5th, Hobson will surely pick up more high-performing kids for 6th grade in SY 20-21 than it would have if WL were able to open its second campus that year. The more momentum Hobson gains in attracting IB families, the stronger the program will be.

SH parent here and I disagree. What does that even mean? Principal is strongly invested in outcomes of all students, not just the more affluent IB ones.

How long have you been IB for the Cluster? We've been here since the mid 90s. The current Hobson principal is clearly far more "strongly invested" in outcomes for neighborhood families than any of his predecessors since the Cluster was set up in the 80s. Hurrah. We'll take it. Even so, we don't know any IB family that's rejected a WL spot for Hobson. Maybe that day is coming.

Long enough to reject your patronizing BS. I know plenty of families who committed to SH even when WL wasn't that big a stretch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting this discussion (on the achievement gap) aside, does this mean that Latin definitely will NOT open a second campus during the 20/21 school year?

Yes, I think so. They would be hard pressed to be up and running in less than a year.

Good, the delay will almost certainly help our IB middle school, Stuart Hobson, consolidate gains made in the last two years under the surprisingly academic tracking and neighborhood-friendly new principal. He's established honors classes in half a dozen subjects, along with a transparent, flexible and fair system for admitting students to advanced classes.

With fewer IB and Hobson feeder 4th graders running off to WL for 5th, Hobson will surely pick up more high-performing kids for 6th grade in SY 20-21 than it would have if WL were able to open its second campus that year. The more momentum Hobson gains in attracting IB families, the stronger the program will be.

SH parent here and I disagree. What does that even mean? Principal is strongly invested in outcomes of all students, not just the more affluent IB ones.

How long have you been IB for the Cluster? We've been here since the mid 90s. The current Hobson principal is clearly far more "strongly invested" in outcomes for neighborhood families than any of his predecessors since the Cluster was set up in the 80s. Hurrah. We'll take it. Even so, we don't know any IB family that's rejected a WL spot for Hobson. Maybe that day is coming.

Long enough to reject your patronizing BS. I know plenty of families who committed to SH even when WL wasn't that big a stretch.

Just FYI - this isn't really about the Hill, SH or the cluster....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting this discussion (on the achievement gap) aside, does this mean that Latin definitely will NOT open a second campus during the 20/21 school year?

Yes, I think so. They would be hard pressed to be up and running in less than a year.

Good, the delay will almost certainly help our IB middle school, Stuart Hobson, consolidate gains made in the last two years under the surprisingly academic tracking and neighborhood-friendly new principal. He's established honors classes in half a dozen subjects, along with a transparent, flexible and fair system for admitting students to advanced classes.

With fewer IB and Hobson feeder 4th graders running off to WL for 5th, Hobson will surely pick up more high-performing kids for 6th grade in SY 20-21 than it would have if WL were able to open its second campus that year. The more momentum Hobson gains in attracting IB families, the stronger the program will be.

SH parent here and I disagree. What does that even mean? Principal is strongly invested in outcomes of all students, not just the more affluent IB ones.

How long have you been IB for the Cluster? We've been here since the mid 90s. The current Hobson principal is clearly far more "strongly invested" in outcomes for neighborhood families than any of his predecessors since the Cluster was set up in the 80s. Hurrah. We'll take it. Even so, we don't know any IB family that's rejected a WL spot for Hobson. Maybe that day is coming.

Regardless of how long you might have lived on the Hill, you demonstrate zero understanding about the origins of the Cluster. It was historically criticized for being established as a carve out for white families on the Hill looking for a viable public option before charters existed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting this discussion (on the achievement gap) aside, does this mean that Latin definitely will NOT open a second campus during the 20/21 school year?

Yes, I think so. They would be hard pressed to be up and running in less than a year.

Good, the delay will almost certainly help our IB middle school, Stuart Hobson, consolidate gains made in the last two years under the surprisingly academic tracking and neighborhood-friendly new principal. He's established honors classes in half a dozen subjects, along with a transparent, flexible and fair system for admitting students to advanced classes.

With fewer IB and Hobson feeder 4th graders running off to WL for 5th, Hobson will surely pick up more high-performing kids for 6th grade in SY 20-21 than it would have if WL were able to open its second campus that year. The more momentum Hobson gains in attracting IB families, the stronger the program will be.

SH parent here and I disagree. What does that even mean? Principal is strongly invested in outcomes of all students, not just the more affluent IB ones.

How long have you been IB for the Cluster? We've been here since the mid 90s. The current Hobson principal is clearly far more "strongly invested" in outcomes for neighborhood families than any of his predecessors since the Cluster was set up in the 80s. Hurrah. We'll take it. Even so, we don't know any IB family that's rejected a WL spot for Hobson. Maybe that day is coming.

Regardless of how long you might have lived on the Hill, you demonstrate zero understanding about the origins of the Cluster. It was historically criticized for being established as a carve out for white families on the Hill looking for a viable public option before charters existed.

I taught in DCPS in the 80s. The system was so dysfunctional then, in the Barry years, that UMC Hill parents of various races desperately sought autonomy from DCPS Central for a few Hill schools. There have always been a lot more black UMC families than white in the Cluster, whatever the criticism. Watkins did a lot better before SWS and CH Montessori got their own buildings, Two Rivers opened, and SH still had a 5th grade - all in the last decade. When WL and BASIS took off 5 off 6 years back, SH's IB population was clobbered. Hobson is finally doing better, through a combination of WL spots being in short supply, only around half of BASIS applicants being offered a spot in the spring in a program in a building with weak facilities, and SH having gained a strong principal in charge of just one Cluster school (vs. all three, a dysfunctional administrative arrangement for many years).

[Anonymous]

The Cluster story screams LACK OF COORDINATION BETWEEN CHARTER SECTOR & DCPS.

Some of us are glad that Latin replication was pulled from the PCSB agenda. The lack of coordination and good planning just gets worse for Cap Hill.

[Anonymous]

For information, please review the board recording.
The board delayed the vote.
WL did not withdraw.
It's the DCPCSB's process and it's decisions and progress is open to the public.
https://livestream.com/accounts/6219837/events/8717220/videos/193011835

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those of you making all achievement judgment based on PARCC scores have clearly never watch teenagers take the PARCC. Schools have zero control over the effort put into the test by any kid in any grade. Ask your own kid(s) if you don't believe me. Mine is one of them.

True. Some students don't care and don't put forth any effort during tests and schoolwork. Where is the parent/family culpability in developing students to be academically motivated and receptive. No program/school/initiative can overcome generational apathy to a great extent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For information, please review the board recording.
The board delayed the vote.
WL did not withdraw.
It's the DCPCSB's process and it's decisions and progress is open to the public.
https://livestream.com/accounts/6219837/events/8717220/videos/193011835

And the Bird provided no information about why this dropped off the agenda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For information, please review the board recording.
The board delayed the vote.
WL did not withdraw.
It's the DCPCSB's process and it's decisions and progress is open to the public.
https://livestream.com/accounts/6219837/events/8717220/videos/193011835

Is this one of those meeting videos that accidentally gets deleted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those of you making all achievement judgment based on PARCC scores have clearly never watch teenagers take the PARCC. Schools have zero control over the effort put into the test by any kid in any grade. Ask your own kid(s) if you don't believe me. Mine is one of them.

My child graduated from Wilson this year and put no effort into the test. What are the consequences for not getting a 3 or better? None. Perhaps DC can make it a requirement similar to what MoCo did/does when I attended in the early-90s, but I'm sure it wouldn't gain any traction.