ludlow-taylor

[Anonymous]

Question for Scott Burger and A LTES teacher and your supporters. If test scores are indeed top drawer for Capitol Hill, and Principal Cobbs is doing the fine job that you claim, why then are so few of the IB gentrifiers (read most of the current neighborhood residents) staying past PreK?

Why, were there only a dozen or so white/high-SES kids above K this past SY in a neighborhood that's mostly white/high-SES? LT bashing drives the exodus locally? That sounds implausible. Something else is going on. What, you tell us.

I remember talking to a good many LT families entering PreS3, and planning to stay to the testing grades, 7 or 8 years ago (when I bought my IB home, partly because I was optimistic about sending my baby there eventually, to take advantage of the Reggio Emilia curriculum). To my knowledge, only one of these families has stayed to a testing grade.

Is there no chance of DCPS rewarding Principal Cobbs for her impressive test scores with some plum alternative assignment in the hopes of making LT work much better for the neighborhood?

[Anonymous]

I think there is a lack of community organization and drive to work together. In order for there to be IB children in testing grades, families must commit to staying. I have seen other schools that used to be majority OOB change because of strong neighborhood alliances and commitment (many schools in upper NW used to have large OOB populations in the eighties and nineties when upper northwest folks sent their children almost exclusively to private schools. These schools now win national awards). It seems pretty simple. Keep your children enrolled and the school will increase its IB population. There are great teachers waiting. However, this won't happen if the community does not come together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think there is a lack of community organization and drive to work together. In order for there to be IB children in testing grades, families must commit to staying. I have seen other schools that used to be majority OOB change because of strong neighborhood alliances and commitment (many schools in upper NW used to have large OOB populations in the eighties and nineties when upper northwest folks sent their children almost exclusively to private schools. These schools now win national awards). It seems pretty simple. Keep your children enrolled and the school will increase its IB population. There are great teachers waiting. However, this won't happen if the community does not come together.

I do completely agree, and I am an IB parent of a rising preschooler, who is not at LT. We had planned to be there, but ended up getting into a better school so took it. I think a big part of why they can't get a core group of IB parents to stay at LT is that there are options, city-wide schools, charters, etc. If it was LT or private, many more of us would stay out of necessity, but right now most of us can get out with a little luck and a few years of lottery perseverance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there is a lack of community organization and drive to work together. In order for there to be IB children in testing grades, families must commit to staying. I have seen other schools that used to be majority OOB change because of strong neighborhood alliances and commitment (many schools in upper NW used to have large OOB populations in the eighties and nineties when upper northwest folks sent their children almost exclusively to private schools. These schools now win national awards). It seems pretty simple. Keep your children enrolled and the school will increase its IB population. There are great teachers waiting. However, this won't happen if the community does not come together.

I do completely agree, and I am an IB parent of a rising preschooler, who is not at LT. We had planned to be there, but ended up getting into a better school so took it. I think a big part of why they can't get a core group of IB parents to stay at LT is that there are options, city-wide schools, charters, etc. If it was LT or private, many more of us would stay out of necessity, but right now most of us can get out with a little luck and a few years of lottery perseverance.

Another neighbor who agrees. There also are a handful of vitriolic anti-LT neighbors who seem hellbent on poisoning the well both here on DCUM and in the neighborhood, which discourages others from trying LT or sticking it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think there is a lack of community organization and drive to work together. In order for there to be IB children in testing grades, families must commit to staying. I have seen other schools that used to be majority OOB change because of strong neighborhood alliances and commitment (many schools in upper NW used to have large OOB populations in the eighties and nineties when upper northwest folks sent their children almost exclusively to private schools. These schools now win national awards). It seems pretty simple. Keep your children enrolled and the school will increase its IB population. There are great teachers waiting. However, this won't happen if the community does not come together.

Well, if too much choice, i.e. too many charters or good DCPSs, is the "issue" today for LT, then a "strong neighborhood alliance" just won't happen. When there was no choice you needed to organize a core number of parents to get a school up to level you wanted it to be and get rid of the OOB population. In the absence of this need, now the schools need to change to attract the type of parents that will help it to be successful. Or in the case of LT, not attract them. The economics have changed from the 80s, 90s and even 00s (for Brent). Now schools need to show to parents that this is the best place for their offspring. Charters are doing this very successfully. Some DCPS less so. At any rate: More choice will mean less neighborhood alliances. That's the new reality.

[Anonymous]

Who wouldn't want the choice to be to make LT he best possible neighborhood school? Instead of opting for other places and settling for mediocrity we need to put forces together and be pioneers and make this an awesome school. The potential is right there...that is what is so frustrating. And these silly anti-Ludlow folks need to chill out. That attitude is bringing all of us down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Question for Scott Burger and A LTES teacher and your supporters. If test scores are indeed top drawer for Capitol Hill, and Principal Cobbs is doing the fine job that you claim, why then are so few of the IB gentrifiers (read most of the current neighborhood residents) staying past PreK?

Why, were there only a dozen or so white/high-SES kids above K this past SY in a neighborhood that's mostly white/high-SES? LT bashing drives the exodus locally? That sounds implausible. Something else is going on. What, you tell us.

I remember talking to a good many LT families entering PreS3, and planning to stay to the testing grades, 7 or 8 years ago (when I bought my IB home, partly because I was optimistic about sending my baby there eventually, to take advantage of the Reggio Emilia curriculum). To my knowledge, only one of these families has stayed to a testing grade.

Is there no chance of DCPS rewarding Principal Cobbs for her impressive test scores with some plum alternative assignment in the hopes of making LT work much better for the neighborhood?

maybe some other schools want to roll out the red carpet and lick the boots to white master/saviors but LT has managed to improve test scores without relying on gentrification.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who wouldn't want the choice to be to make LT he best possible neighborhood school? Instead of opting for other places and settling for mediocrity we need to put forces together and be pioneers and make this an awesome school. The potential is right there...that is what is so frustrating. And these silly anti-Ludlow folks need to chill out. That attitude is bringing all of us down.

don't come expecting special treatment or with an agenda that doesn't really benefit students and you'll be fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who wouldn't want the choice to be to make LT he best possible neighborhood school? Instead of opting for other places and settling for mediocrity we need to put forces together and be pioneers and make this an awesome school. The potential is right there...that is what is so frustrating. And these silly anti-Ludlow folks need to chill out. That attitude is bringing all of us down.

don't come expecting special treatment or with an agenda that doesn't really benefit students and you'll be fine.

I don't see how that is a very welcoming attitude. And I guess, yes, I really do expect the school that I send my kid to for PK to be welcoming. I'm not sure that it makes sense or is helpful to the LT parent cause to call the former LT parents' concerns silly - their experiences are their experiences. I wouldn't discount them or tell new families to ignore them. What seems reasonable is to discuss how the current families and the school have learned from those experiences and the plans for the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who wouldn't want the choice to be to make LT he best possible neighborhood school? Instead of opting for other places and settling for mediocrity we need to put forces together and be pioneers and make this an awesome school. The potential is right there...that is what is so frustrating. And these silly anti-Ludlow folks need to chill out. That attitude is bringing all of us down.

don't come expecting special treatment or with an agenda that doesn't really benefit students and you'll be fine.

I don't see how that is a very welcoming attitude. And I guess, yes, I really do expect the school that I send my kid to for PK to be welcoming. I'm not sure that it makes sense or is helpful to the LT parent cause to call the former LT parents' concerns silly - their experiences are their experiences. I wouldn't discount them or tell new families to ignore them. What seems reasonable is to discuss how the current families and the school have learned from those experiences and the plans for the future.

Sure, and I agree. But some of the biggest haters are parents who have never sent their kids to LT, other than the playground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for Scott Burger and A LTES teacher and your supporters. If test scores are indeed top drawer for Capitol Hill, and Principal Cobbs is doing the fine job that you claim, why then are so few of the IB gentrifiers (read most of the current neighborhood residents) staying past PreK?

Why, were there only a dozen or so white/high-SES kids above K this past SY in a neighborhood that's mostly white/high-SES? LT bashing drives the exodus locally? That sounds implausible. Something else is going on. What, you tell us.

I remember talking to a good many LT families entering PreS3, and planning to stay to the testing grades, 7 or 8 years ago (when I bought my IB home, partly because I was optimistic about sending my baby there eventually, to take advantage of the Reggio Emilia curriculum). To my knowledge, only one of these families has stayed to a testing grade.

Is there no chance of DCPS rewarding Principal Cobbs for her impressive test scores with some plum alternative assignment in the hopes of making LT work much better for the neighborhood?

maybe some other schools want to roll out the red carpet and lick the boots to white master/saviors but LT has managed to improve test scores without relying on gentrification.

You are a horrible person.

[Anonymous]

What I really struggle with in this conversation is the assumption that IB parents need to "put forces together and be pioneers and make this an awesome school."

Based not only on the DC-CAS scores but on my observation (and I am an LT parent), LT already IS a great school. I think it's a shame more IB parents don't appreciate LT, but I don't think LT needs IB parents/students to make it better.

And I *really* hate the way "get rid of the OOB population" is considered improvement.

Sure, one could make the argument that a high percentage of OOB families is the result of IB families avoiding the school and implies (but doesn't prove) there's something problematic there.

But even if you make that argument, OOB students, in and of themselves, are not the problem and don't need to be gotten rid of. (And it's hard not to suspect OOB & IB are code for low-income black & high-SES white, respectively.)

I don't care whether my kid goes to school with other kids her color or with high-SES kids; on the contrary, I *want* her to go to school with classmates who are diverse both ethnically and economically.

I am delighted that LT offers her the opportunity to do that, and I am confident that the school offers a warm, safe, and orderly environment that encourages high academic achievement among students from many backgrounds in different wards of DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I don't care whether my kid goes to school with other kids her color or with high-SES kids; on the contrary, I *want* her to go to school with classmates who are diverse both ethnically and economically.

I am delighted that LT offers her the opportunity to do that, and I am confident that the school offers a warm, safe, and orderly environment that encourages high academic achievement among students from many backgrounds in different wards of DC.

I agree that the diversity of LT is one of its strengths. But I also think it (and all DCPS schools) should be citywide schools - why should the in-boundary families get preference at that school at all? The only argument families have against LT is that the principal is at times hostile or suspicious that inboundary families will try to push out those from other parts of the city. And that she and the school do not try to recruit or retain them. Fair enough - but maybe no school should be made up of neighborhood kids. Why do we have that model at all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who wouldn't want the choice to be to make LT he best possible neighborhood school? Instead of opting for other places and settling for mediocrity we need to put forces together and be pioneers and make this an awesome school. The potential is right there...that is what is so frustrating. And these silly anti-Ludlow folks need to chill out. That attitude is bringing all of us down.

don't come expecting special treatment or with an agenda that doesn't really benefit students and you'll be fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the diversity of LT is one of its strengths. But I also think it (and all DCPS schools) should be citywide schools - why should the in-boundary families get preference at that school at all? The only argument families have against LT is that the principal is at times hostile or suspicious that inboundary families will try to push out those from other parts of the city. And that she and the school do not try to recruit or retain them. Fair enough - but maybe no school should be made up of neighborhood kids. Why do we have that model at all?

We only attended LT for a month, so while yes, I did get more than enough of an impression of the principal through meetings, robo calls, etc, I do not know as much about the school as many of you do. I will say, that I did NOT find the school diverse at all, not by typical standards at least. The PS was close to entirely white, PK seemed to have a nice racial mix and K and up was almost entirely black. That is not really diversity at all in my book (aside from PK).