Anonymous wrote:Which out-of-date stats? Banneker is now 2% white?
Whatever, the school is behind the times and needs to change.
Not a huge difference, but the most recent data is 3%. I point that out because if someone called me out for using incorrect data I might at least double check my references. It's here if you want to see it. https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/9/
So Banneker is a little more than 70% black, a little more than 20% Latino, around 3% white. Translation: nowhere near diverse enough for most high SES DC parents of all races. Whatever its merits, Banneker feels seriously irrelevant to this Asian parent, a school that belongs in a bygone era, my immigrant parents' time.
But something tells me if the school was 70% white you'd be ok with that.
Anonymous wrote:Huh? This post makes no sense to me, and has no bearing on Banneker vs. Walls. TJ may have strong Asian representations, but is still quite diverse, become more so due to a new admissions system.
It's "diverse" the same way Banneker is. What's the difference?
Anonymous wrote:Guys, Banneker is a minority choice for every demographic in the city. So is BASIS and Latin and DCI and Duke and Walls etc. Surely we understand how school choice works by now? Just because a school doesn’t appeal to absolutely everyone doesn’t mean it needs to change.
Ivy League interviewer who gave up on Banneker here who disagrees strongly. There are many very bright, hard-working, ambitious, super talented students in the Banneker building who are poorly served by hidebound admins whose college admissions advice emanates from a bygone era, a previous generation. Banneker may be fine for the UMC families who can provide a lot of their own enrichment and college admissions inputs. Not so hot for the rest. If I were a low SES minority family reaching for the stars for college, I'd head to Basis, Latin or Walls if possible, vs. Banneker. Banneker operates in too much of an affirmative action cocoon these days. The leadership isn't moving with the times.
So the low SES Banneker kids posting on Instagram yesterday about their full rides to top 20 schools should actually be upset with the results? What more is some other school going to do for them, get Harvard to pay them $100,000 to attend?
. Banneker rests on is laurels far too much in college admissions. The Supreme Court will come at affirmative action next year. possibly hard. Banneker doesn’t seem to have heard the wake-up call. Time for the school to up its game and broaden its reach.
I think you don't understand what the phrase "rests on its laurels" means. The post to which you replied referenced the most current graduating class's successes. If we are not judge a school on its most recent performance then what measure would you suggest?
Recent performance doesn't impress me terribly because Banneker relies heavily on our country's 60-year-old tradition of affirmative action admissions, whose days are probably numbered due to Trump's SC appointments. Deeply average SAT and AP scores belie the mediocrity of academics overall, although I'm aware that a tiny minority of students overcome obstacles to cracks colleges admitting in the single digits. I'd be impressed if Banneker attracted a high-performing AND reasonably diverse student body, and their SAT and AP scores knocked it out the park for the demographic.
You are SOOO full of it. First of all, Banneker does not get many white applicants so I don't understand your affirmative action statement. Secondly, when my son was at Banneker, he got a D in latin. He went to Gonzaga for summer school. The teacher told him he did not understand how he got a D b/c my son knew more latin then the Latin II students at Gonzaga. Banneker has lots of incredibly bright students who do not come from a background that is able to game the system and pay for lots of SAT supports.
Ivy League interviewer here who wishes I was actually full of it.
While none of the Banneker students I interviewed for my alma mater was offered a spot at my Ivy, many told me that they got spots at other elite colleges with a few AP scores of 3 and 4 and SATs in the 500s and 600s. In the same situation, an Asian applicant at the same place on the socioeconomic spectrum would almost certainly have needed half a dozen AP scores of 5 and SATs in the 700s to be admitted to the same elite colleges. I know this because I used to interview for my alma mater in NYC, where low SES Asian applicants enrolled in test-in magnet schools like Brooklyn Tech, Bronx Science, Hunter College and Stuyvesant with high scores were routinely turned down by the same elite colleges Banneker students get into. However, if Banneker applicants had brought the sort of scores the low SES Asian students in NYC do to the table, they would probably have made the cut at my super selective alma mater.
I see affirmative action withering on the vine in the coming years, leaving me to wish that Banneker admins, teachers and parents and DCPS leaders would get the message that future students are going to need better support to get into elite colleges. Above all, I wish that DC would set up serious GT programming at the ES and MS level to serve future Banneker students. In NYC, low SES minority students get a big head start in scoring high on APs and SAT as compared to Banneker students, because they come up through full-time GT programs from a young age. I know that NYC recently changed their GT system, but least they still have one, unlike the District.
Bronx Science and Stuyvesant have, combined, about 6,000 students relative to less than 500 at Banneker, and yet Banneker still has more total black students. If DC had a competitive exam school, it would not look like Banneker and it would serve a different group of students. Which maybe it should have, but these are separate issues.
The group of students would probably be very diverse. DC has the most educated African-American population in the country. However, a lot of the kids are in private schools. A lot of those kids would be in a true magnet program if offered in ES and MS. In fact, DC has the largest percentage of kids in private schools in the country. With forward thinking leadership, a really good GT program could be in place. Plenty of models to follow. Chicago seems to have a good one. Just takes will and that has to come from parents. Complaining and whining on DCUM won't get it done ..
What does the bolded phrase "diverse" means. It means different things to different people. For the sake of argument let's start with a definition that "diversity" would mean that the school's hypothetical population would be demographically the same as DC's school age population. The data tells us there exists correlation between low-SES/UMC status and performance on tests and in academic success. We know that the population in DC that is at risk is disproportionately black. We know that the population of UMC is disproportionately white. Based on those three knowns it is clear that that the population would NOT match that of DC. And measured against that standard of "diversity" it would fail. I'm not saying that's wrong but we need to address that elephant before we can design a plan.
If "diversity" means some parts black/white without regard to the actual school age population what is the desired allocation? And how do you arrive at it without accusations of bias or social engineering?
The fact that a test-in school in DC has a higher percentage of black students than does a test-in school in a jurisdiction somewhere with very few black students doesn't really illustrate "diversity".
My point is this: you drastically oversimplify the issue and recite platitudes about "forward thinking leadership". Before you pronounce how easy this all is start with this? What is the definition of "diversity" your easy plan seeks to achieve?
You seem to be seeking perfection and that doesn't exist. Diversity in this context means racial and economic equality or as close as you can get. Walls is good example. It's certainly not perfect but it's not monolithic either.
I'm pretty sure looking at programs in other cities is not a platitude or "forward thinking" in any way. But it does take will and vision. I was in a magnet program many years ago in a city that was and is pretty much 60% Black. There was self-segregation and really little that could be done about it. The educational opportunity drastically outweighed anything else and still does. Your line of thinking is probably is why DC doesn't have magnet program. You won't to find reasons against and problems. You have to start first and there are a lot of examples to look too. So it's not some gargantuan lift that you are making it out to be. DCPS is roughly 50K students which is pretty small in comparison to other major cities. Pretty sad not to have a magnet program and 30% of school age kids in private schools.
Maybe I'm just wrong and out of touch. But paying for private school as the only viable option for on grade level or advanced kids is not the way any place I've lived has functioned.
You did it again! These terms need to be defined so we understand what our goal is. You really think that defining "diversity" as "racial and economic equality" is any more clear of a policy goal?
Maybe the way racial equality and access to schools was distributed "many years ago" ought not be the standard by which we measure desired outcomes today.
Oh, and DCPS is 50,000. And Charters are another 50,000. While 100,000 isn't huge by any standard might I suggest your bone fides might be brandished were you to have a basic understanding of the academic environment about which you seek to opine?
But tell us more about how educational access, diversity and segregation in the 70s and 80s is what we should aspire to my friend.
Yelp..You keep doing it--finding a reason NOT to do it People like to say what does "diversity" mean or what's the policy? All they are really saying is "We can't do that because it won't work." I have no interest in that discussion simply because you'll never get any where. It will always come back to "perfection." I'm no educator but I do see the families that are stretching themselves thin to pay for private school just to ensure their kid's future. Racial Equality is a myth and schools are still very segregated as the 70s. So what's your permanent or proposed solution..Do we go back to busing kids an hour away?
Fascinating Convo Thou....
My proposed solution is....for the city council to finally pass a law on GT education in the District for starters, like our near neighbors in MD and VA did in the 1990s. Require all DCPS K-8 programs to test the intellectually gifted and to provide appropriate services to these kids, with ample structure and funding. Create multiple test-in middle school programs for the intellectually gifted, including at least one Across the River. End social promotion in all public middle schools in the District. If kids can't meet grade-level academic standards, provide them with effective interventions until they can advance a grade on their merits. Upgrade and expand vocational high school training options in the District while adding rigor for the college bound. Build more serious admission high school magnet programs. Copy Chicago's approach to GT. Chicago does a much better job than Boston and NYC in identifying and nurturing low SES minority academic talent in K-12 education. Move beyond affirmative action oriented admissions planning for low SES minority students in the District. Aim higher for minority students shooting for competitive colleges, BASIS approach to preparing for AP exams vs. Banneker approach, anticipating that affirmative action is on its way out.
"Low-ses minority talent" groups together groups that do not have aligned interests or outcomes. The low income kids who benefit the most in terms of testing into g&t programs are immigrant or second-gen kids. No school in any city is filling genuinely test-in gifted programs with low-income non-immigrant kids of any race. Create test-in middle school programs and the students will be UMC kids of all races (but disproportionately white and Asian). Put g&t resources across the river and the main result will be exacerbating gentrification.
Chicago has been dealing with this as well, even though they don't do straight admission based on scores but have a tier system based on zip code. But they still didn't like the economic and racial outcomes so they're trying to further de emphasize the test to change who gets in. (And this is for test in elementary schools as well, so it's not just about starting earlier.)
This first-gen immigrant Brooklyn Tech grad with a spouse who's a first-gen Boston Latin grad doesn't agree. We are people of color. Disproportionately white and Asian worked much better for us in high school than a peer group that was almost entirely low ses black and Latino in our neighborhood schools. Our UMC hs peers probably did as much to get us to elite college as our teachers. Gentrification can raise all boats with the tide as long as low and moderate-income housing unit set asides are ensured. Expanding an urban tax base creates numerous positive externalities from which low-income residents accrue the benefit. Trapping the most academic low ses minority students in urban schools with where almost all of the other students are also minorities doesn't work for us. We'd like to see Banneker attract sizeable cohorts of whites and Asians in its new building.
Anonymous wrote:Which out-of-date stats? Banneker is now 2% white?
Whatever, the school is behind the times and needs to change.
Not a huge difference, but the most recent data is 3%. I point that out because if someone called me out for using incorrect data I might at least double check my references. It's here if you want to see it. https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/9/
So Banneker is a little more than 70% black, a little more than 20% Latino, around 3% white. Translation: nowhere near diverse enough for most high SES DC parents of all races. Whatever its merits, Banneker feels seriously irrelevant to this Asian parent, a school that belongs in a bygone era, my immigrant parents' time.
But something tells me if the school was 70% white you'd be ok with that.
No, I'd much rather send my kid to a school that was far more ethically/culturally diverse.
Anonymous wrote:Which out-of-date stats? Banneker is now 2% white?
Whatever, the school is behind the times and needs to change.
Not a huge difference, but the most recent data is 3%. I point that out because if someone called me out for using incorrect data I might at least double check my references. It's here if you want to see it. https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/9/
So Banneker is a little more than 70% black, a little more than 20% Latino, around 3% white. Translation: nowhere near diverse enough for most high SES DC parents of all races. Whatever its merits, Banneker feels seriously irrelevant to this Asian parent, a school that belongs in a bygone era, my immigrant parents' time.
But something tells me if the school was 70% white you'd be ok with that.
No, I'd much rather send my kid to a school that was far more ethically/culturally diverse.
Pfffth. Literally no poster has ever opted out of Janney to attend a more diverse school. You are full of it.
Anonymous wrote:Which out-of-date stats? Banneker is now 2% white?
Whatever, the school is behind the times and needs to change.
Not a huge difference, but the most recent data is 3%. I point that out because if someone called me out for using incorrect data I might at least double check my references. It's here if you want to see it. https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/9/
So Banneker is a little more than 70% black, a little more than 20% Latino, around 3% white. Translation: nowhere near diverse enough for most high SES DC parents of all races. Whatever its merits, Banneker feels seriously irrelevant to this Asian parent, a school that belongs in a bygone era, my immigrant parents' time.
But something tells me if the school was 70% white you'd be ok with that.
No, I'd much rather send my kid to a school that was far more ethically/culturally diverse.
Pfffth. Literally no poster has ever opted out of Janney to attend a more diverse school. You are full of it.
Sorry poster should be person. But no DCUM poster nor no person opted out of Janney because of lack of diversity.
Anonymous wrote:Guys, Banneker is a minority choice for every demographic in the city. So is BASIS and Latin and DCI and Duke and Walls etc. Surely we understand how school choice works by now? Just because a school doesn’t appeal to absolutely everyone doesn’t mean it needs to change.
Ivy League interviewer who gave up on Banneker here who disagrees strongly. There are many very bright, hard-working, ambitious, super talented students in the Banneker building who are poorly served by hidebound admins whose college admissions advice emanates from a bygone era, a previous generation. Banneker may be fine for the UMC families who can provide a lot of their own enrichment and college admissions inputs. Not so hot for the rest. If I were a low SES minority family reaching for the stars for college, I'd head to Basis, Latin or Walls if possible, vs. Banneker. Banneker operates in too much of an affirmative action cocoon these days. The leadership isn't moving with the times.
So the low SES Banneker kids posting on Instagram yesterday about their full rides to top 20 schools should actually be upset with the results? What more is some other school going to do for them, get Harvard to pay them $100,000 to attend?
. Banneker rests on is laurels far too much in college admissions. The Supreme Court will come at affirmative action next year. possibly hard. Banneker doesn’t seem to have heard the wake-up call. Time for the school to up its game and broaden its reach.
I think you don't understand what the phrase "rests on its laurels" means. The post to which you replied referenced the most current graduating class's successes. If we are not judge a school on its most recent performance then what measure would you suggest?
Recent performance doesn't impress me terribly because Banneker relies heavily on our country's 60-year-old tradition of affirmative action admissions, whose days are probably numbered due to Trump's SC appointments. Deeply average SAT and AP scores belie the mediocrity of academics overall, although I'm aware that a tiny minority of students overcome obstacles to cracks colleges admitting in the single digits. I'd be impressed if Banneker attracted a high-performing AND reasonably diverse student body, and their SAT and AP scores knocked it out the park for the demographic.
You are SOOO full of it. First of all, Banneker does not get many white applicants so I don't understand your affirmative action statement. Secondly, when my son was at Banneker, he got a D in latin. He went to Gonzaga for summer school. The teacher told him he did not understand how he got a D b/c my son knew more latin then the Latin II students at Gonzaga. Banneker has lots of incredibly bright students who do not come from a background that is able to game the system and pay for lots of SAT supports.
Ivy League interviewer here who wishes I was actually full of it.
While none of the Banneker students I interviewed for my alma mater was offered a spot at my Ivy, many told me that they got spots at other elite colleges with a few AP scores of 3 and 4 and SATs in the 500s and 600s. In the same situation, an Asian applicant at the same place on the socioeconomic spectrum would almost certainly have needed half a dozen AP scores of 5 and SATs in the 700s to be admitted to the same elite colleges. I know this because I used to interview for my alma mater in NYC, where low SES Asian applicants enrolled in test-in magnet schools like Brooklyn Tech, Bronx Science, Hunter College and Stuyvesant with high scores were routinely turned down by the same elite colleges Banneker students get into. However, if Banneker applicants had brought the sort of scores the low SES Asian students in NYC do to the table, they would probably have made the cut at my super selective alma mater.
I see affirmative action withering on the vine in the coming years, leaving me to wish that Banneker admins, teachers and parents and DCPS leaders would get the message that future students are going to need better support to get into elite colleges. Above all, I wish that DC would set up serious GT programming at the ES and MS level to serve future Banneker students. In NYC, low SES minority students get a big head start in scoring high on APs and SAT as compared to Banneker students, because they come up through full-time GT programs from a young age. I know that NYC recently changed their GT system, but least they still have one, unlike the District.
Bronx Science and Stuyvesant have, combined, about 6,000 students relative to less than 500 at Banneker, and yet Banneker still has more total black students. If DC had a competitive exam school, it would not look like Banneker and it would serve a different group of students. Which maybe it should have, but these are separate issues.
The group of students would probably be very diverse. DC has the most educated African-American population in the country. However, a lot of the kids are in private schools. A lot of those kids would be in a true magnet program if offered in ES and MS. In fact, DC has the largest percentage of kids in private schools in the country. With forward thinking leadership, a really good GT program could be in place. Plenty of models to follow. Chicago seems to have a good one. Just takes will and that has to come from parents. Complaining and whining on DCUM won't get it done ..
What does the bolded phrase "diverse" means. It means different things to different people. For the sake of argument let's start with a definition that "diversity" would mean that the school's hypothetical population would be demographically the same as DC's school age population. The data tells us there exists correlation between low-SES/UMC status and performance on tests and in academic success. We know that the population in DC that is at risk is disproportionately black. We know that the population of UMC is disproportionately white. Based on those three knowns it is clear that that the population would NOT match that of DC. And measured against that standard of "diversity" it would fail. I'm not saying that's wrong but we need to address that elephant before we can design a plan.
If "diversity" means some parts black/white without regard to the actual school age population what is the desired allocation? And how do you arrive at it without accusations of bias or social engineering?
The fact that a test-in school in DC has a higher percentage of black students than does a test-in school in a jurisdiction somewhere with very few black students doesn't really illustrate "diversity".
My point is this: you drastically oversimplify the issue and recite platitudes about "forward thinking leadership". Before you pronounce how easy this all is start with this? What is the definition of "diversity" your easy plan seeks to achieve?
You seem to be seeking perfection and that doesn't exist. Diversity in this context means racial and economic equality or as close as you can get. Walls is good example. It's certainly not perfect but it's not monolithic either.
I'm pretty sure looking at programs in other cities is not a platitude or "forward thinking" in any way. But it does take will and vision. I was in a magnet program many years ago in a city that was and is pretty much 60% Black. There was self-segregation and really little that could be done about it. The educational opportunity drastically outweighed anything else and still does. Your line of thinking is probably is why DC doesn't have magnet program. You won't to find reasons against and problems. You have to start first and there are a lot of examples to look too. So it's not some gargantuan lift that you are making it out to be. DCPS is roughly 50K students which is pretty small in comparison to other major cities. Pretty sad not to have a magnet program and 30% of school age kids in private schools.
Maybe I'm just wrong and out of touch. But paying for private school as the only viable option for on grade level or advanced kids is not the way any place I've lived has functioned.
You did it again! These terms need to be defined so we understand what our goal is. You really think that defining "diversity" as "racial and economic equality" is any more clear of a policy goal?
Maybe the way racial equality and access to schools was distributed "many years ago" ought not be the standard by which we measure desired outcomes today.
Oh, and DCPS is 50,000. And Charters are another 50,000. While 100,000 isn't huge by any standard might I suggest your bone fides might be brandished were you to have a basic understanding of the academic environment about which you seek to opine?
But tell us more about how educational access, diversity and segregation in the 70s and 80s is what we should aspire to my friend.
Yelp..You keep doing it--finding a reason NOT to do it People like to say what does "diversity" mean or what's the policy? All they are really saying is "We can't do that because it won't work." I have no interest in that discussion simply because you'll never get any where. It will always come back to "perfection." I'm no educator but I do see the families that are stretching themselves thin to pay for private school just to ensure their kid's future. Racial Equality is a myth and schools are still very segregated as the 70s. So what's your permanent or proposed solution..Do we go back to busing kids an hour away?
Fascinating Convo Thou....
My proposed solution is....for the city council to finally pass a law on GT education in the District for starters, like our near neighbors in MD and VA did in the 1990s. Require all DCPS K-8 programs to test the intellectually gifted and to provide appropriate services to these kids, with ample structure and funding. Create multiple test-in middle school programs for the intellectually gifted, including at least one Across the River. End social promotion in all public middle schools in the District. If kids can't meet grade-level academic standards, provide them with effective interventions until they can advance a grade on their merits. Upgrade and expand vocational high school training options in the District while adding rigor for the college bound. Build more serious admission high school magnet programs. Copy Chicago's approach to GT. Chicago does a much better job than Boston and NYC in identifying and nurturing low SES minority academic talent in K-12 education. Move beyond affirmative action oriented admissions planning for low SES minority students in the District. Aim higher for minority students shooting for competitive colleges, BASIS approach to preparing for AP exams vs. Banneker approach, anticipating that affirmative action is on its way out.
"Low-ses minority talent" groups together groups that do not have aligned interests or outcomes. The low income kids who benefit the most in terms of testing into g&t programs are immigrant or second-gen kids. No school in any city is filling genuinely test-in gifted programs with low-income non-immigrant kids of any race. Create test-in middle school programs and the students will be UMC kids of all races (but disproportionately white and Asian). Put g&t resources across the river and the main result will be exacerbating gentrification.
Chicago has been dealing with this as well, even though they don't do straight admission based on scores but have a tier system based on zip code. But they still didn't like the economic and racial outcomes so they're trying to further de emphasize the test to change who gets in. (And this is for test in elementary schools as well, so it's not just about starting earlier.)
This first-gen immigrant Brooklyn Tech grad with a spouse who's a first-gen Boston Latin grad doesn't agree. We are people of color. Disproportionately white and Asian worked much better for us in high school than a peer group that was almost entirely low ses black and Latino in our neighborhood schools. Our UMC hs peers probably did as much to get us to elite college as our teachers. Gentrification can raise all boats with the tide as long as low and moderate-income housing unit set asides are ensured. Expanding an urban tax base creates numerous positive externalities from which low-income residents accrue the benefit. Trapping the most academic low ses minority students in urban schools with where almost all of the other students are also minorities doesn't work for us. We'd like to see Banneker attract sizeable cohorts of whites and Asians in its new building.
I'm not commenting on whether this is good or bad. The tax base issue was huge for Chicago. And it would be great for my kids. But you can see why that's politically a hard sell.
Anonymous wrote:Which out-of-date stats? Banneker is now 2% white?
Whatever, the school is behind the times and needs to change.
Not a huge difference, but the most recent data is 3%. I point that out because if someone called me out for using incorrect data I might at least double check my references. It's here if you want to see it. https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/9/
So Banneker is a little more than 70% black, a little more than 20% Latino, around 3% white. Translation: nowhere near diverse enough for most high SES DC parents of all races. Whatever its merits, Banneker feels seriously irrelevant to this Asian parent, a school that belongs in a bygone era, my immigrant parents' time.
But something tells me if the school was 70% white you'd be ok with that.
No, I'd much rather send my kid to a school that was far more ethically/culturally diverse.
Pfffth. Literally no poster has ever opted out of Janney to attend a more diverse school. You are full of it.
Sorry poster should be person. But no DCUM poster nor no person opted out of Janney because of lack of diversity.
Anonymous wrote:Guys, Banneker is a minority choice for every demographic in the city. So is BASIS and Latin and DCI and Duke and Walls etc. Surely we understand how school choice works by now? Just because a school doesn’t appeal to absolutely everyone doesn’t mean it needs to change.
Ivy League interviewer who gave up on Banneker here who disagrees strongly. There are many very bright, hard-working, ambitious, super talented students in the Banneker building who are poorly served by hidebound admins whose college admissions advice emanates from a bygone era, a previous generation. Banneker may be fine for the UMC families who can provide a lot of their own enrichment and college admissions inputs. Not so hot for the rest. If I were a low SES minority family reaching for the stars for college, I'd head to Basis, Latin or Walls if possible, vs. Banneker. Banneker operates in too much of an affirmative action cocoon these days. The leadership isn't moving with the times.
So the low SES Banneker kids posting on Instagram yesterday about their full rides to top 20 schools should actually be upset with the results? What more is some other school going to do for them, get Harvard to pay them $100,000 to attend?
. Banneker rests on is laurels far too much in college admissions. The Supreme Court will come at affirmative action next year. possibly hard. Banneker doesn’t seem to have heard the wake-up call. Time for the school to up its game and broaden its reach.
I think you don't understand what the phrase "rests on its laurels" means. The post to which you replied referenced the most current graduating class's successes. If we are not judge a school on its most recent performance then what measure would you suggest?
Recent performance doesn't impress me terribly because Banneker relies heavily on our country's 60-year-old tradition of affirmative action admissions, whose days are probably numbered due to Trump's SC appointments. Deeply average SAT and AP scores belie the mediocrity of academics overall, although I'm aware that a tiny minority of students overcome obstacles to cracks colleges admitting in the single digits. I'd be impressed if Banneker attracted a high-performing AND reasonably diverse student body, and their SAT and AP scores knocked it out the park for the demographic.
You are SOOO full of it. First of all, Banneker does not get many white applicants so I don't understand your affirmative action statement. Secondly, when my son was at Banneker, he got a D in latin. He went to Gonzaga for summer school. The teacher told him he did not understand how he got a D b/c my son knew more latin then the Latin II students at Gonzaga. Banneker has lots of incredibly bright students who do not come from a background that is able to game the system and pay for lots of SAT supports.
Ivy League interviewer here who wishes I was actually full of it.
While none of the Banneker students I interviewed for my alma mater was offered a spot at my Ivy, many told me that they got spots at other elite colleges with a few AP scores of 3 and 4 and SATs in the 500s and 600s. In the same situation, an Asian applicant at the same place on the socioeconomic spectrum would almost certainly have needed half a dozen AP scores of 5 and SATs in the 700s to be admitted to the same elite colleges. I know this because I used to interview for my alma mater in NYC, where low SES Asian applicants enrolled in test-in magnet schools like Brooklyn Tech, Bronx Science, Hunter College and Stuyvesant with high scores were routinely turned down by the same elite colleges Banneker students get into. However, if Banneker applicants had brought the sort of scores the low SES Asian students in NYC do to the table, they would probably have made the cut at my super selective alma mater.
I see affirmative action withering on the vine in the coming years, leaving me to wish that Banneker admins, teachers and parents and DCPS leaders would get the message that future students are going to need better support to get into elite colleges. Above all, I wish that DC would set up serious GT programming at the ES and MS level to serve future Banneker students. In NYC, low SES minority students get a big head start in scoring high on APs and SAT as compared to Banneker students, because they come up through full-time GT programs from a young age. I know that NYC recently changed their GT system, but least they still have one, unlike the District.
Bronx Science and Stuyvesant have, combined, about 6,000 students relative to less than 500 at Banneker, and yet Banneker still has more total black students. If DC had a competitive exam school, it would not look like Banneker and it would serve a different group of students. Which maybe it should have, but these are separate issues.
The group of students would probably be very diverse. DC has the most educated African-American population in the country. However, a lot of the kids are in private schools. A lot of those kids would be in a true magnet program if offered in ES and MS. In fact, DC has the largest percentage of kids in private schools in the country. With forward thinking leadership, a really good GT program could be in place. Plenty of models to follow. Chicago seems to have a good one. Just takes will and that has to come from parents. Complaining and whining on DCUM won't get it done ..
What does the bolded phrase "diverse" means. It means different things to different people. For the sake of argument let's start with a definition that "diversity" would mean that the school's hypothetical population would be demographically the same as DC's school age population. The data tells us there exists correlation between low-SES/UMC status and performance on tests and in academic success. We know that the population in DC that is at risk is disproportionately black. We know that the population of UMC is disproportionately white. Based on those three knowns it is clear that that the population would NOT match that of DC. And measured against that standard of "diversity" it would fail. I'm not saying that's wrong but we need to address that elephant before we can design a plan.
If "diversity" means some parts black/white without regard to the actual school age population what is the desired allocation? And how do you arrive at it without accusations of bias or social engineering?
The fact that a test-in school in DC has a higher percentage of black students than does a test-in school in a jurisdiction somewhere with very few black students doesn't really illustrate "diversity".
My point is this: you drastically oversimplify the issue and recite platitudes about "forward thinking leadership". Before you pronounce how easy this all is start with this? What is the definition of "diversity" your easy plan seeks to achieve?
You seem to be seeking perfection and that doesn't exist. Diversity in this context means racial and economic equality or as close as you can get. Walls is good example. It's certainly not perfect but it's not monolithic either.
I'm pretty sure looking at programs in other cities is not a platitude or "forward thinking" in any way. But it does take will and vision. I was in a magnet program many years ago in a city that was and is pretty much 60% Black. There was self-segregation and really little that could be done about it. The educational opportunity drastically outweighed anything else and still does. Your line of thinking is probably is why DC doesn't have magnet program. You won't to find reasons against and problems. You have to start first and there are a lot of examples to look too. So it's not some gargantuan lift that you are making it out to be. DCPS is roughly 50K students which is pretty small in comparison to other major cities. Pretty sad not to have a magnet program and 30% of school age kids in private schools.
Maybe I'm just wrong and out of touch. But paying for private school as the only viable option for on grade level or advanced kids is not the way any place I've lived has functioned.
You did it again! These terms need to be defined so we understand what our goal is. You really think that defining "diversity" as "racial and economic equality" is any more clear of a policy goal?
Maybe the way racial equality and access to schools was distributed "many years ago" ought not be the standard by which we measure desired outcomes today.
Oh, and DCPS is 50,000. And Charters are another 50,000. While 100,000 isn't huge by any standard might I suggest your bone fides might be brandished were you to have a basic understanding of the academic environment about which you seek to opine?
But tell us more about how educational access, diversity and segregation in the 70s and 80s is what we should aspire to my friend.
Yelp..You keep doing it--finding a reason NOT to do it People like to say what does "diversity" mean or what's the policy? All they are really saying is "We can't do that because it won't work." I have no interest in that discussion simply because you'll never get any where. It will always come back to "perfection." I'm no educator but I do see the families that are stretching themselves thin to pay for private school just to ensure their kid's future. Racial Equality is a myth and schools are still very segregated as the 70s. So what's your permanent or proposed solution..Do we go back to busing kids an hour away?
Fascinating Convo Thou....
My proposed solution is....for the city council to finally pass a law on GT education in the District for starters, like our near neighbors in MD and VA did in the 1990s. Require all DCPS K-8 programs to test the intellectually gifted and to provide appropriate services to these kids, with ample structure and funding. Create multiple test-in middle school programs for the intellectually gifted, including at least one Across the River. End social promotion in all public middle schools in the District. If kids can't meet grade-level academic standards, provide them with effective interventions until they can advance a grade on their merits. Upgrade and expand vocational high school training options in the District while adding rigor for the college bound. Build more serious admission high school magnet programs. Copy Chicago's approach to GT. Chicago does a much better job than Boston and NYC in identifying and nurturing low SES minority academic talent in K-12 education. Move beyond affirmative action oriented admissions planning for low SES minority students in the District. Aim higher for minority students shooting for competitive colleges, BASIS approach to preparing for AP exams vs. Banneker approach, anticipating that affirmative action is on its way out.
"Low-ses minority talent" groups together groups that do not have aligned interests or outcomes. The low income kids who benefit the most in terms of testing into g&t programs are immigrant or second-gen kids. No school in any city is filling genuinely test-in gifted programs with low-income non-immigrant kids of any race. Create test-in middle school programs and the students will be UMC kids of all races (but disproportionately white and Asian). Put g&t resources across the river and the main result will be exacerbating gentrification.
Chicago has been dealing with this as well, even though they don't do straight admission based on scores but have a tier system based on zip code. But they still didn't like the economic and racial outcomes so they're trying to further de emphasize the test to change who gets in. (And this is for test in elementary schools as well, so it's not just about starting earlier.)
This first-gen immigrant Brooklyn Tech grad with a spouse who's a first-gen Boston Latin grad doesn't agree. We are people of color. Disproportionately white and Asian worked much better for us in high school than a peer group that was almost entirely low ses black and Latino in our neighborhood schools. Our UMC hs peers probably did as much to get us to elite college as our teachers. Gentrification can raise all boats with the tide as long as low and moderate-income housing unit set asides are ensured. Expanding an urban tax base creates numerous positive externalities from which low-income residents accrue the benefit. Trapping the most academic low ses minority students in urban schools with where almost all of the other students are also minorities doesn't work for us. We'd like to see Banneker attract sizeable cohorts of whites and Asians in its new building.
I'm not commenting on whether this is good or bad. The tax base issue was huge for Chicago. And it would be great for my kids. But you can see why that's politically a hard sell.
Yes, I can see why posting on this thread is pointless.
Anonymous wrote:Guys, Banneker is a minority choice for every demographic in the city. So is BASIS and Latin and DCI and Duke and Walls etc. Surely we understand how school choice works by now? Just because a school doesn’t appeal to absolutely everyone doesn’t mean it needs to change.
Ivy League interviewer who gave up on Banneker here who disagrees strongly. There are many very bright, hard-working, ambitious, super talented students in the Banneker building who are poorly served by hidebound admins whose college admissions advice emanates from a bygone era, a previous generation. Banneker may be fine for the UMC families who can provide a lot of their own enrichment and college admissions inputs. Not so hot for the rest. If I were a low SES minority family reaching for the stars for college, I'd head to Basis, Latin or Walls if possible, vs. Banneker. Banneker operates in too much of an affirmative action cocoon these days. The leadership isn't moving with the times.
So the low SES Banneker kids posting on Instagram yesterday about their full rides to top 20 schools should actually be upset with the results? What more is some other school going to do for them, get Harvard to pay them $100,000 to attend?
. Banneker rests on is laurels far too much in college admissions. The Supreme Court will come at affirmative action next year. possibly hard. Banneker doesn’t seem to have heard the wake-up call. Time for the school to up its game and broaden its reach.
I think you don't understand what the phrase "rests on its laurels" means. The post to which you replied referenced the most current graduating class's successes. If we are not judge a school on its most recent performance then what measure would you suggest?
Recent performance doesn't impress me terribly because Banneker relies heavily on our country's 60-year-old tradition of affirmative action admissions, whose days are probably numbered due to Trump's SC appointments. Deeply average SAT and AP scores belie the mediocrity of academics overall, although I'm aware that a tiny minority of students overcome obstacles to cracks colleges admitting in the single digits. I'd be impressed if Banneker attracted a high-performing AND reasonably diverse student body, and their SAT and AP scores knocked it out the park for the demographic.
You are SOOO full of it. First of all, Banneker does not get many white applicants so I don't understand your affirmative action statement. Secondly, when my son was at Banneker, he got a D in latin. He went to Gonzaga for summer school. The teacher told him he did not understand how he got a D b/c my son knew more latin then the Latin II students at Gonzaga. Banneker has lots of incredibly bright students who do not come from a background that is able to game the system and pay for lots of SAT supports.
Ivy League interviewer here who wishes I was actually full of it.
While none of the Banneker students I interviewed for my alma mater was offered a spot at my Ivy, many told me that they got spots at other elite colleges with a few AP scores of 3 and 4 and SATs in the 500s and 600s. In the same situation, an Asian applicant at the same place on the socioeconomic spectrum would almost certainly have needed half a dozen AP scores of 5 and SATs in the 700s to be admitted to the same elite colleges. I know this because I used to interview for my alma mater in NYC, where low SES Asian applicants enrolled in test-in magnet schools like Brooklyn Tech, Bronx Science, Hunter College and Stuyvesant with high scores were routinely turned down by the same elite colleges Banneker students get into. However, if Banneker applicants had brought the sort of scores the low SES Asian students in NYC do to the table, they would probably have made the cut at my super selective alma mater.
I see affirmative action withering on the vine in the coming years, leaving me to wish that Banneker admins, teachers and parents and DCPS leaders would get the message that future students are going to need better support to get into elite colleges. Above all, I wish that DC would set up serious GT programming at the ES and MS level to serve future Banneker students. In NYC, low SES minority students get a big head start in scoring high on APs and SAT as compared to Banneker students, because they come up through full-time GT programs from a young age. I know that NYC recently changed their GT system, but least they still have one, unlike the District.
Clearly the Ivy grad who interviewed students know a more about the caliber of Banneker students than parents who have or had kids there. Unbelievable! Ivy grad interviewer has some sort of axe to grind and it is clear it centers around affirmative action and Asians since she mentioned it above. Let’s be honest, the Banneker students she interviewed didn’t stand a chance! She already made up her mind as soon as she saw she was interviewing a black student.
That’s not the impression I got at all. Sounds like the Ivy League interviewer really wanted to help Banneker applicants gain admission to his or her alma mater but was stymied because the kids hadn’t been prepped or pushed adequately from a young age. These are obvious, deeply rooted problems. Don’t shoot the messenger.
Banneker kids do really well in college. That tells you that test scores are missing a big part of the equation. They are smart kids who have not had the resources to supplement their educations. However, Banneker is clearly doing something right. Test scores never tell the entire story and don't measure intelligence.
Anonymous wrote:Sounds like a post full of hateful white people, as usual. Affirmative action is there for a reason! You sound so excited that the next administration is going to “come at it hard”. Compare the schools without showing off how racist you are. Ok?
I wouldn't say it's just white people. Plenty of Asians are complaining too because they think they're special for paying boatloads of money to be able to regurgitate facts/stats on tests.
Anonymous wrote:Guys, Banneker is a minority choice for every demographic in the city. So is BASIS and Latin and DCI and Duke and Walls etc. Surely we understand how school choice works by now? Just because a school doesn’t appeal to absolutely everyone doesn’t mean it needs to change.
Ivy League interviewer who gave up on Banneker here who disagrees strongly. There are many very bright, hard-working, ambitious, super talented students in the Banneker building who are poorly served by hidebound admins whose college admissions advice emanates from a bygone era, a previous generation. Banneker may be fine for the UMC families who can provide a lot of their own enrichment and college admissions inputs. Not so hot for the rest. If I were a low SES minority family reaching for the stars for college, I'd head to Basis, Latin or Walls if possible, vs. Banneker. Banneker operates in too much of an affirmative action cocoon these days. The leadership isn't moving with the times.
So the low SES Banneker kids posting on Instagram yesterday about their full rides to top 20 schools should actually be upset with the results? What more is some other school going to do for them, get Harvard to pay them $100,000 to attend?
. Banneker rests on is laurels far too much in college admissions. The Supreme Court will come at affirmative action next year. possibly hard. Banneker doesn’t seem to have heard the wake-up call. Time for the school to up its game and broaden its reach.
I think you don't understand what the phrase "rests on its laurels" means. The post to which you replied referenced the most current graduating class's successes. If we are not judge a school on its most recent performance then what measure would you suggest?
Recent performance doesn't impress me terribly because Banneker relies heavily on our country's 60-year-old tradition of affirmative action admissions, whose days are probably numbered due to Trump's SC appointments. Deeply average SAT and AP scores belie the mediocrity of academics overall, although I'm aware that a tiny minority of students overcome obstacles to cracks colleges admitting in the single digits. I'd be impressed if Banneker attracted a high-performing AND reasonably diverse student body, and their SAT and AP scores knocked it out the park for the demographic.
You are SOOO full of it. First of all, Banneker does not get many white applicants so I don't understand your affirmative action statement. Secondly, when my son was at Banneker, he got a D in latin. He went to Gonzaga for summer school. The teacher told him he did not understand how he got a D b/c my son knew more latin then the Latin II students at Gonzaga. Banneker has lots of incredibly bright students who do not come from a background that is able to game the system and pay for lots of SAT supports.
Ivy League interviewer here who wishes I was actually full of it.
While none of the Banneker students I interviewed for my alma mater was offered a spot at my Ivy, many told me that they got spots at other elite colleges with a few AP scores of 3 and 4 and SATs in the 500s and 600s. In the same situation, an Asian applicant at the same place on the socioeconomic spectrum would almost certainly have needed half a dozen AP scores of 5 and SATs in the 700s to be admitted to the same elite colleges. I know this because I used to interview for my alma mater in NYC, where low SES Asian applicants enrolled in test-in magnet schools like Brooklyn Tech, Bronx Science, Hunter College and Stuyvesant with high scores were routinely turned down by the same elite colleges Banneker students get into. However, if Banneker applicants had brought the sort of scores the low SES Asian students in NYC do to the table, they would probably have made the cut at my super selective alma mater.
I see affirmative action withering on the vine in the coming years, leaving me to wish that Banneker admins, teachers and parents and DCPS leaders would get the message that future students are going to need better support to get into elite colleges. Above all, I wish that DC would set up serious GT programming at the ES and MS level to serve future Banneker students. In NYC, low SES minority students get a big head start in scoring high on APs and SAT as compared to Banneker students, because they come up through full-time GT programs from a young age. I know that NYC recently changed their GT system, but least they still have one, unlike the District.
Clearly the Ivy grad who interviewed students know a more about the caliber of Banneker students than parents who have or had kids there. Unbelievable! Ivy grad interviewer has some sort of axe to grind and it is clear it centers around affirmative action and Asians since she mentioned it above. Let’s be honest, the Banneker students she interviewed didn’t stand a chance! She already made up her mind as soon as she saw she was interviewing a black student.
That’s not the impression I got at all. Sounds like the Ivy League interviewer really wanted to help Banneker applicants gain admission to his or her alma mater but was stymied because the kids hadn’t been prepped or pushed adequately from a young age. These are obvious, deeply rooted problems. Don’t shoot the messenger.
Banneker kids do really well in college. That tells you that test scores are missing a big part of the equation. They are smart kids who have not had the resources to supplement their educations. However, Banneker is clearly doing something right. Test scores never tell the entire story and don't measure intelligence.
How I the world would you know this? What are you basing this on?
Honestly, how would Banneker even know this? They might (might---I actually doubt this) track college graduation rates but they most certainly don't track college grades.
Anonymous wrote:Sounds like a post full of hateful white people, as usual. Affirmative action is there for a reason! You sound so excited that the next administration is going to “come at it hard”. Compare the schools without showing off how racist you are. Ok?
I agree with you. Dread all Banneker threads because the comments are gross. It’s the same group of commenters too.
Not hateful white people: realistic people of various races.
I doubt that the SC would have taken the Chapel Hill case, which was never even appealed at the state level, if Roberts didn't have change in mind. The only question is, how much change and at which institutions (just public universities?).
Fact is, the architects of affirmative action in the 1960s, including MLK, never framed it as a permanent solution to addressing racial equality.
Which is good. Because fact is, affirmative action benefits white women more than it does racial minorities. All this angst over affirmative action is going to backfire when white women stop making progress in education and the workforce since they've been the #1 beneficiaries since forever.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
People like to say what does "diversity" mean or what's the policy? All they are really saying is "We can't do that because it won't work." I have no interest in that discussion simply because you'll never get any where. It will always come back to "perfection." I'm no educator but I do see the families that are stretching themselves thin to pay for private school just to ensure their kid's future. Racial Equality is a myth and schools are still very segregated as the 70s. So what's your permanent or proposed solution..Do we go back to busing kids an hour away?