Latin v. BASIS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious, how can Latin only have 10% FARMS if they knock themselves out retaining struggling kids?

If the average Public Charter school is 70% FARMS why do the schools often mentioned on these boards have very, very different numbers of low income students?

Surely it has to be more than the luck of the lottery, give that the overall pool of public school students in the District are, by any definition, low income.

Sorry. Your analysis is just not very scientific. Parents self-select in applying, including parents of FARMS. Latin has many working poor and lower middle class families, as my own has been at many points during our time in DC. You have a very narrow view of 'diversity' and 'urban' if it only includes homogenous low SES .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm curious, how can Latin only have 10% FARMS if they knock themselves out retaining struggling kids?

If the average Public Charter school is 70% FARMS why do the schools often mentioned on these boards have very, very different numbers of low income students?

Surely it has to be more than the luck of the lottery, give that the overall pool of public school students in the District are, by any definition, low income.

It would be about who is choosing to enter the lotteries for these schools. The school can do tons of outreach all over the city and still only attract a largely middle class applicant pool. Just like lots of middle class families know about KIPP and DC Prep and are invited to apply, but many so not. When you have a choice system with schools offering a certain thing ( immersion, montessori, STEM, extended day and year, Expeditionary Learning, IB ) ,you can't blame the school for attracting a group who favors that thing for some reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:15:26- though I don't necessarily know anything about Latin, I do love the term "snowflake academies". Public schools should be for all kids. Whether is is policies that weed out kids or curriculum that only a select few can do well with the undercurrent needs to stop. We need to stop endorsing the "private school on the public dime" mentality. Niche market schools are fine, but it should theoretically be possible for any type of child to get the support he or she needs to do well.

1) Public schools are open to all kids, i.e. they are free and can't discriminate based on race, religion, gender, etc. Just because a few schools are designed for say 10-20% of the population, e.g. a magnate school, doesn't violate this principle as long as there are other schools available (which should be quality schools that serve the general population [80%]).

2) Following your logic, you are arguing that public education that offers a curriculum that a small amount of students (compared to the general population) would do well should not be offered and parents, regardless of SES should pay out of pocket in the private market or attend a regular public school. However, you obviously don't think that average kids can cut it at these "snowflake academies" so offering the curriculum to every child won't work so basically, if you have smart/or hardworking child and you are working or middle class you should send your child to private school despite the cost/whether or not you can afford to or send them to an average performing public school and hope that teachers have the time and resources to meet them where they are? You realize that this will never happen, no matter if all kids started out with an equitable education-- I wish people would stop lying to themselves and realize that most people are of average intelligence, some people are not overachievers nor do they want to be, will not attend college and need to be supported to pursue other occupations which is okay (and I don't mean flipping burgers, but blue collar jobs or professional service jobs that are needed by society and should be respected and paid accordingly). I have family in the UK, my cousins attended free schools through college or specialized training. One became a lawyer, another a financier, another an electrician, etc. Although I don't agree with tracking, especially at an early age (and I am glad that the American education system is more fluid) I do think my family's educational experience makes sense in the UK as the education system recognizes that people will follow a different path. I have friends from Switzerland etc., that had similar educational experiences.

We can offer different educational programs for different levels of ability AND interest and still be a fair system. But saying BASIS, Latin, TJ, Stuyvesant, etc. shouldn't exist because all kids can't meet expectations or are ready is ridiculous. We live in a global competitive world and if the US is to keep up, we need these PUBLIC institutions to serve kids that will lead us into the future--you better believe that other countries will or are doing that. Kids forced to attend bad schools is a separate issue and definitely needs to be addressed but that issue shouldn't take away from the other end of the spectrum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:15:26- though I don't necessarily know anything about Latin, I do love the term "snowflake academies". Public schools should be for all kids. Whether is is policies that weed out kids or curriculum that only a select few can do well with the undercurrent needs to stop. We need to stop endorsing the "private school on the public dime" mentality. Niche market schools are fine, but it should theoretically be possible for any type of child to get the support he or she needs to do well.

I don't get it. The kids who work ridiculously hard to keep up with the rigorous curriculum at schools like Latin and even more at BASIS are being labeled frail "snowflakes" while lazy, do nothing, could care less kids who don't even try to do well at minimum standards are, what? More hardy and deserving in some way? Please change your labeling if not your attitude.

I don't get it either. What on earth is wrong with offering, at one or even a handful of DC schools, "a curriculum that only a select few can do well with?" Why is it so wrong for ANY school in the District to offer a challenging curriculum, just because not every kid in the District can do the curriculum?

Nor is it "policies to weed out kids." Obviously Latin operates by lottery, and all kids have identical chances of getting in. But more important, when my kid was at Latin we saw the school knocking itself out with counseling, tutoring etc. to retain kids who were struggling. Also they offer different tracks in some subjects, so kids who arrive less prepared can still do well on their particular track.

My pet theory is that people who paid the premium to move into Ward 3 do not like the idea of you being able to get an education that is equivalent or better to theirs. So, first of all this upsets their sense of entitlement - they paid more, so they should get more. Period. Secondly, specialty charter schools actually draw students out of the Ward 3 schools - which means there's more room for OOB students to come in. They perceive this to be a watering down of their preferred student body and it is very threatening.

If someone paid twice as much money for a shabby little house which feeds into JKLM then you paid for your gigantic townhouse in a neighborhood with bad schools, then they need to feel superior to you, dammit! And now, you have school options which are attractive? Well, that's not so good for the old investment...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:15:26- though I don't necessarily know anything about Latin, I do love the term "snowflake academies". Public schools should be for all kids. Whether is is policies that weed out kids or curriculum that only a select few can do well with the undercurrent needs to stop. We need to stop endorsing the "private school on the public dime" mentality. Niche market schools are fine, but it should theoretically be possible for any type of child to get the support he or she needs to do well.

But saying BASIS, Latin, TJ, Stuyvesant, etc. shouldn't exist because all kids can't meet expectations or are ready is ridiculous. We live in a global competitive world and if the US is to keep up, we need these PUBLIC institutions to serve kids that will lead us into the future--you better believe that other countries will or are doing that. Kids forced to attend bad schools is a separate issue and definitely needs to be addressed but that issue shouldn't take away from the other end of the spectrum.

Actually, I think that entrance exams and aptitude tests, coupled with an any-public-school-anywhere model (like in many European countries) are the best way to equalize the system and give fair equitable access to all children. The system here is just entirely too backwards for that to ever pan out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No- I think I missed the mark with what I was saying, or maybe my point is poorly developed. Roots is more "snowflake" than BASIS in my opinion. There would be no hope for my hard working white kid with ADHD there. A niche market in my mind is immersion or Montessori or something like that. But even those have to have plans in place to give all different kinds a chance at success.

I gently disagree that every public school needs meet the needs of every kid ( including your hard working child with ADHD ). Perhaps, yes, if it is a neighborhood school that is valid. But if it is some sort of an opt-in situation ( like language immersion, or montessori or any charter school ) I think that it is the parent's responsibility to also make sure it is a good fit for their student before they opt in. I have kids who are not tempermentally well-suited for Montessori. So I am not going there. I have kids strong on the arts, but not in Math an Science. I am not applying to McKinley or Howard Math and Science Academy. And I don;t feel that those schools should not exist or should make extraordinary efforts to change their central missions to suit my child's particularities. I am glad that they do exist for those who can benefit from them. Same with academic magnet schools that have examinations for entrance and performing arts schools that have auditions. Glad they are out there even if my kids can't make the minumum standards to get it.

[Anonymous]

My pet theory is that people who paid the premium to move into Ward 3 do not like the idea of you being able to get an education that is equivalent or better to theirs. So, first of all this upsets their sense of entitlement - they paid more, so they should get more. Period. Secondly, specialty charter schools actually draw students out of the Ward 3 schools - which means there's more room for OOB students to come in. They perceive this to be a watering down of their preferred student body and it is very threatening.

If someone paid twice as much money for a shabby little house which feeds into JKLM then you paid for your gigantic townhouse in a neighborhood with bad schools, then they need to feel superior to you, dammit! And now, you have school options which are attractive? Well, that's not so good for the old investment...

No, honestly, a lot of us can afford private and send our kids to private as the default. Our home values don't go down and really never have, so it's not about investment.

Coffee shop chatter up here is that it would be nice to have a very competitive, exam-entrance PUBLIC high school option --- akin to Stuyvesant or T.J. Banneker and SWW sure ain't it. Since Stuyvesant doesn't exist in DC, and it never will because DC's population is 500,000, not 5 million .... we go to GDS.

(full disclosure, our kids go to private but I'm intrigued by BASIS so I'm on this thread. I fear though that BASIS will fall prey to the realities of the DC population and not become Stuyvesant-like, no matter what its curriculum guide states. see, e.g., the 2-track problem at Yu Ying.)

[Anonymous]

The biggest bashing Latin receives is the perception that Latin is across the board a 'rich' (it's not) and that it's students are undeserving of support (they are). It's too bad, because it is a unique school trying to do unique things, and I would hope that story would not get ignored just because some of the participants have the audacity to be middle class, or even well off.

[Anonymous]

Amazing what kind of misinformation some people are posting here. Case in point, that Latin only has 10% FARMS. That is simply false, so people should get their facts straight before posting. the following comes directly from the Latin Open House: 30% are FARMS.

[Anonymous]

They have Latin confused with Yu Ying which is <10% FARMS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No, honestly, a lot of us can afford private and send our kids to private as the default. Our home values don't go down and really never have, so it's not about investment.

Coffee shop chatter up here is that it would be nice to have a very competitive, exam-entrance PUBLIC high school option --- akin to Stuyvesant or T.J. Banneker and SWW sure ain't it. Since Stuyvesant doesn't exist in DC, and it never will because DC's population is 500,000, not 5 million .... we go to GDS.

(full disclosure, our kids go to private but I'm intrigued by BASIS so I'm on this thread. I fear though that BASIS will fall prey to the realities of the DC population and not become Stuyvesant-like, no matter what its curriculum guide states. see, e.g., the 2-track problem at Yu Ying.)

I worry about that problem as well, PP. I'm thinking of taking a chance on BASIS, though.

My understanding from the information sessions is that BASIS does not engage in social promotion. Each child must test into the next grade by passing comprehensive exams at the end of the year. If a child is woefully unprepared and cannot be caught up by the support staff, he will spend multiple years in the fifth grade until he either learns what is required for promotion to the sixth grade or withdraws to attend a school that promotes socially.

Furthermore, although BASIS does not admit students based on the results of admission exams, it does place students based on the results of placement exams. So, if a child applies to BASIS for the seventh grade but is not prepared for the BASIS seventh grade curriculum, he will be placed in the sixth grade or even the fifth grade. I imagine that few families would be wiling to have their child repeat one or two years of school just to attend BASIS.

[Anonymous]

I hope that latin and basis succeed, just as I hope kipp and thurgood marshall succeeed. Some part of the self-selection of students is always going to be simple logistics: which schools are closest, and how easily they can be accessed by metro...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amazing what kind of misinformation some people are posting here. Case in point, that Latin only has 10% FARMS. That is simply false, so people should get their facts straight before posting. the following comes directly from the Latin Open House: 30% are FARMS.

Latin "lower school": 13.5% low income -- http://www.dcpubliccharter.com/data/images/latin_upshur_ms10-11.pdf
Latin "upper school": 31.7% low income -- http://www.dcpubliccharter.com/data/images/latin_high_hs10-11.pdf
Yu Ying: 19.5% low income -- http://www.dcpubliccharter.com/data/images/yuying_ap10-11.pdf

It's not like the real data are hard to find....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amazing what kind of misinformation some people are posting here. Case in point, that Latin only has 10% FARMS. That is simply false, so people should get their facts straight before posting. the following comes directly from the Latin Open House: 30% are FARMS.

Wow, this is fascinating! So the OSSE website reports that only 10% of Latin students taking the DC CAS are FARMS.

The school reports 30%.

That means someone is lying. Or wait, maybe Latin is 30% FARMs and they "encourage" those students not to take the tests?

In the meantime, I'm more inclined to believe OSSE's data unless you can move beyond hearsay from an open house.

[Anonymous]

Nice try.

OSSE says 6.6% of the lower school at Latin is FARM and 9.6% of the upper school is FARM.

Yes, the real data isn't hard to find.