SWS -- Atmosphere and Leadership

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There isn't really much substance in the discussion here. Sounds more like a bunch of dissatisfied people who couldn't get in.
The racial aspect is ludicrous. John raised his kids in Capitol Hill twenty years ago when none of you would have set a foot there. If he was a racist at that point, he would have moved out to McLean (with all the other ones).


SWS is the most loving place you could be at and I understand that some of you might become "haters" because you didn't get in. Get over it. Life goes on. There are other great schools out there. If we didn't get in, I can think of five other good schools that would have been just fine.

There is no racism at school. Not among the staff, nor the kids. John will hire who is best suited for the job irrespective of skin color. The mission is to provide an education as close to Reggio Emilia principles as possible. And that's it. If you don't understand what that means, please familiarize yourself with what these principles are.

No one is calling John a racist, FFS. We're saying he could be doing more to make the community more inclusive and diverse. That's not to say he hates black people -- it's just to say he (and all of them) need to work harder to make their city-wide school more reflective of the actual city.

[Anonymous]

AND they need to fix aftercare, AND that awful, recurring lice problem, AND "what about a school play for my DD?!", AND figure out how to make a program work in a decaying building with $0 in modernizations funds, AND not piss off the neighbors, AND grow a school by 350% in 3 years AND manage a medically fragile classroom and high spectrum population, AND move twice in two years, AND hire people who you feel will be a good fit for the educational model and the community AND make sure the white liberal guilt of your student body is mitigated because you're recruiting More brown people, AND keep increasing the amount of money you raise every year. I mean, how could anyone flounder with any of these things? Piece of cake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a 5+ year parent at SWS. I am grateful that my kids got into and go to this school. At the same time, I am unhappy with the school's efforts around diversity.

I have talked to the principal on numerous occasions and received the same 'oh well - what can you do?' type response. Given another option for a school, we would take it. SWS has slid by on a lot of things because parents were happy on some levels with the education. I hope this most recent surge in voices questioning practices will result in some changes.

I used to buy in to the AA parents wanted different educational approaches for their children. I don't anymore - AA parents ranging from the security guard to others have commented that if they'd known about this school, they would have applied. There is a lot the school could be doing to reach out to AA parents - for starters, specifically asking current AA parents to volunteer at open houses, DCPS events and the MOTH school info night. Let's not give the school a pass.

I've just skimmed this thread, but anybody finding it reminiscent of the thread on CMI and its lack of diversity in both staff and student body a few weeks ago? Down to the comments about lack of diversity at open houses, reasons put forth by defenders for said lack of diversity, etc. Not sure if both are examples of DC schools that, either by design or inattentiveness to the issue, are less diverse than perhaps they could be, or whether all of it is overblown.

[Anonymous]

Hmm, What do CMI and SWS have in common that may make both schools somewhat less attractive to some AA families?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm, What do CMI and SWS have in common that may make both schools somewhat less attractive to some AA families?

Perhaps educational approaches that are perceived as being fluffier than what some AAs families may want, and/or reputations that have grown due to word-of-mouth among mostly white DC residents? I don't know if either explanation is accurate, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AND they need to fix aftercare, AND that awful, recurring lice problem, AND "what about a school play for my DD?!", AND figure out how to make a program work in a decaying building with $0 in modernizations funds, AND not piss off the neighbors, AND grow a school by 350% in 3 years AND manage a medically fragile classroom and high spectrum population, AND move twice in two years, AND hire people who you feel will be a good fit for the educational model and the community AND make sure the white liberal guilt of your student body is mitigated because you're recruiting More brown people, AND keep increasing the amount of money you raise every year. I mean, how could anyone flounder with any of these things? Piece of cake.

Citywide charters are also struggling with these same issues without the infrastructure support by DCPS and with less money per student. Not to minimize the fact that it's challenging, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm, What do CMI and SWS have in common that may make both schools somewhat less attractive to some AA families?

Perhaps the inverse question should be asked. I'm not familiar with CMI due to location, but will say some of these schools who brag about inclusivity can do that because they've drawn similar, like-minded people. There's nothing stopping non-white people from applying, but if they're not feeling the warmth and fuzziness when they visit, that continues to make the applicant pool more homogenous. I don't think it's fair to single out CMI and SWS, there are some city-wide schools that make it clear they are only trying to serve a specific population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm, What do CMI and SWS have in common that may make both schools somewhat less attractive to some AA families?

Perhaps educational approaches that are perceived as being fluffier than what some AAs families may want, and/or reputations that have grown due to word-of-mouth among mostly white DC residents? I don't know if either explanation is accurate, though.

Quite possibly. Not everyone is completely comfortable with what SWS puts out there. As we've seen though, it's easier, or at the very least more interesting and entertaining, to blame the school for racist policies or not trying hard enough to recruit AA families. To be clear, we are talking about a school where a full third of the student don't classify themselves as Caucasian. Not 10%, not 15%, but 32% of the school wouldn't classify themselves as white. That's a giant problem with diversity.

[Anonymous]

Funny, when SWS started it was predominately African-American. You might ask to look at some of the early photo albums. You also might note that the school predates your tenure on Capitol Hill. Let's face it, you wouldn't have lived on the Hill when the original teachers, 3 white and 1 A-A started SWS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an outside observer I have notice the following asp possible citrin using factors :

1) aftercare or should I say"extended day enrichment" includes Irish step dancing

2) the principal has historically let in families (even since becoming a city wide school) who aren't even on the wait list but who lobby really hard. Not sure what criteria he is using when allowing these families in, but it isn't diversity, from what I have observed.

3) when SWS was in the Peabody building, and started at pk4, while Peabody started at pk3, only families who could afford daycare an extra year could enroll in SWS, because SWS had a policy of not allowing in transfers from Peabody. This difference contributed to the "upstairs downstairs"' appearance.

Wow! Yuck

+1, number 2 doesn't surprise me at all

I can attest that the principal is not doing this anymore (but can't confirm or deny if he ever did - though I have heard of many schools doing this in the past, not just SWS). My kid got in through pure luck this year (and I am happy to be there because my kid is HAPPY at this school). There is an audit group that is overseeing the lottery this year and making sure the schools are following it, fyi.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sure they are. Look at diversity in other citywide programs. Like Logan. Same neighborhood, 54% AA, 35% white. No citywide charter has managed to be so white. Maybe sibling preference explains a lot, but they should be knocking themselves out trying to recruit a wider mix of kids.

GUFFAW -- reverse the dynamics of that statement there and apply it to Miner, Payne, Burroughs, Eliot Hine, any of the 99% AA schools in this city. "Those black schools should be knocking themselves out trying to recruit some white kids!" There are literally 10 new spots a year at this school and everyone is wringing their hands about them. Practically every young kid local to the hill is white. Get off it.

Now, the hiring of teachers, yes I agree that's different and controllable, and very possibly an area for valid concern. But again OP, help me out with understanding what you're going to do with a blurb from an AA family that comes on here (BTW they're busy, I doubt they're even here, and you should know that they have both the brains and the balls to have this conversation for themselves) and says "Yes, we feel discriminated against and I've just been too afraid to mention it, thank God you've given me a venue here!" THEN you're going to take it up with the school? Or is this entire thread an easy way for you to assuage your own doubts and icky liberal tingles? "There, I've DONE something, I posted it on DCUM!"

Using Miner and Payne, etc, is a false equivalent, and you know it. Some of those schools HAVE tried hard to attract and retain white neighbors, with mixed results. Even though there are growing numbers of white children in DC, they are concentrated in a handful of DCPS and a small number of popular charters.

And there are plenty of motivated AA families in DC who knock themselves out to get their kids to better schools, whether they are charters or WOTP DCPS that have had historically had OOB seats. IF they're not applying to SWS, then why not? What does it hurt to take a good look at the program and see if it could be made more appealing to these families?

Weren't there literally 1 or 2 nonsibling seats available for PS3 this year? I am not sure that the current demographics of the school tells you much about the demographics of those applying. They are just largely self replicating, at least for the moment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sure they are. Look at diversity in other citywide programs. Like Logan. Same neighborhood, 54% AA, 35% white. No citywide charter has managed to be so white. Maybe sibling preference explains a lot, but they should be knocking themselves out trying to recruit a wider mix of kids.

GUFFAW -- reverse the dynamics of that statement there and apply it to Miner, Payne, Burroughs, Eliot Hine, any of the 99% AA schools in this city. "Those black schools should be knocking themselves out trying to recruit some white kids!" There are literally 10 new spots a year at this school and everyone is wringing their hands about them. Practically every young kid local to the hill is white. Get off it.

Now, the hiring of teachers, yes I agree that's different and controllable, and very possibly an area for valid concern. But again OP, help me out with understanding what you're going to do with a blurb from an AA family that comes on here (BTW they're busy, I doubt they're even here, and you should know that they have both the brains and the balls to have this conversation for themselves) and says "Yes, we feel discriminated against and I've just been too afraid to mention it, thank God you've given me a venue here!" THEN you're going to take it up with the school? Or is this entire thread an easy way for you to assuage your own doubts and icky liberal tingles? "There, I've DONE something, I posted it on DCUM!"

Using Miner and Payne, etc, is a false equivalent, and you know it. Some of those schools HAVE tried hard to attract and retain white neighbors, with mixed results. Even though there are growing numbers of white children in DC, they are concentrated in a handful of DCPS and a small number of popular charters.

And there are plenty of motivated AA families in DC who knock themselves out to get their kids to better schools, whether they are charters or WOTP DCPS that have had historically had OOB seats. IF they're not applying to SWS, then why not? What does it hurt to take a good look at the program and see if it could be made more appealing to these families?

Weren't there literally 1 or 2 nonsibling seats available for PS3 this year? I am not sure that the current demographics of the school tells you much about the demographics of those applying. They are just largely self replicating, at least for the moment.

I totally agree. But you have to admit--admissions that are almost exclusively white siblings, very few non-white teachers, hiring white parents as teachers, and a principal who SEEMS not to care--the optics are not the best.

[Anonymous]

Exactly ehat are those optics saying PP? That they hired some white parents, who are not only familiar with Reggio, the school itself, their expectations and philosophy, but who are highly motivated to succeed and who also have established relationships with many of the students and parents at the school? That Burst, who is constantly being put on the defense about this, may not address questions the way you'd hope? That the eight available slots every year are being fought after by a group of predominantly white preschool parents? What, exactly, are you deducing? That these people, who have stuck with DCPS rather than leave for a charter, who have left sidwell, or taught in predominantly black DCPS schools for decades are really just a bunch of racist jerks? Because fascists would make the exact same decisions these people have made for the last 29 years? What a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly ehat are those optics saying PP? That they hired some white parents, who are not only familiar with Reggio, the school itself, their expectations and philosophy, but who are highly motivated to succeed and who also have established relationships with many of the students and parents at the school? That Burst, who is constantly being put on the defense about this, may not address questions the way you'd hope? That the eight available slots every year are being fought after by a group of predominantly white preschool parents? What, exactly, are you deducing? That these people, who have stuck with DCPS rather than leave for a charter, who have left sidwell, or taught in predominantly black DCPS schools for decades are really just a bunch of racist jerks? Because fascists would make the exact same decisions these people have made for the last 29 years? What a joke.

Heads up, PP -- you are not doing your beloved school any favors. Au contraire!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly ehat are those optics saying PP? That they hired some white parents, who are not only familiar with Reggio, the school itself, their expectations and philosophy, but who are highly motivated to succeed and who also have established relationships with many of the students and parents at the school? That Burst, who is constantly being put on the defense about this, may not address questions the way you'd hope? That the eight available slots every year are being fought after by a group of predominantly white preschool parents? What, exactly, are you deducing? That these people, who have stuck with DCPS rather than leave for a charter, who have left sidwell, or taught in predominantly black DCPS schools for decades are really just a bunch of racist jerks? Because fascists would make the exact same decisions these people have made for the last 29 years? What a joke.

Heads up, PP -- you are not doing your beloved school any favors. Au contraire!

Oui! They don't like me much either, but a spade's a spade PP!