Why Hebrew immersion at Sela?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

Bravo! Nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

And...? "At risk" is used as an approximation of kids with IEPs or special needs or poor academic performance. While that doesn't track 100%, the data suggests it is a reasonable proxy. Much like UMC and white serves as a proxy for higher performing kids with lower SN numbers. That's neither good nor bad. It is what the data tells us and how it correlates. Against that backdrop, so what? Someone said they want more higher performing kids and fewer below grade level. That's what any parent of any race or SES status would say. It is what almost all of my POC and Hispanic friends want too. The only people I hear objecting to higher performing cohorts are parents of delinquent troublemakers who consume an inordinate amount of resources or SJW who talk a good game...and then send their kids to private HS.

I am hopeful that the moment has passed where people apologize for wanting good schools and high performing cohorts. If you associate that desire with racism then what you are suggesting somehow is that low performing = POC. THAT is racist, offensive and regressive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

Typo PP not OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

Typo PP not OP

Nice try, but no. I’m pointing out the obvious fact that people who go on at great length about the changes that DCPS needs to make (tracking - despite the explicitly racist history of tracking in DCPS, expelling kids with discipline issues — despite the mountain of evidence demonstrating that expulsion and suspension are meted out differently for identical behaviors between white and black students, “ending social promotion” despite everything that the evidence tells us about the effects of retention) without ever giving a second’s thought to the children that their pet policies would negatively impact — seem like sociopaths. And as the PP who proudly proclaimed while advocating for many racially problematic policies that they are “glad white people are done apologizing” demonstrates, it’s pretty clear where the posters on this board stand — screw the poor kids, I want my kid to have the best of everything.

Everyone wants better for their kids. That’s not the issue. School safety needs to be improved , that’s not the issue. Kids should be challenged, advocating for that is not the issue. What IS an issue is demanding those things and ignoring or — as DCUM posters love to do — denigrating poor kids while doing so (Google “thugs” and DCUM is you doubt this).

And no, I am the product of very troubled public schools (on par with the worst of DC) and the parent of DCPS K-12 kids, so sorry to disappoint, but I’m not PP’s stereotype of a hypocritical liberal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choice is always good but it does seem like an odd option for DC, especially given that the vast majority of the students at the school are not Jewish.

1) There are only about 6 million Hebrew speakers in Israel/Palestine and just about 9 million worldwide. There are more native Greek speakers worldwide than Hebrew but yet no publicly funded Greek school.

2) There are about 1.2 billion Mandarin speakers in the world, 500 million Spanish speakers, 365 million Arabic speakers, etc. Seems like adding immersion schools in DC with the most common (and thus most useful) languages would make more sense than Hebrew

3) Most people in Israel speak English, so you really don't need Hebrew to get around there.

4) Given that almost all Hebrew speakers are Jewish and/or Israeli (and Palestinians who need it there), how does the school deal with religious and political issues? What materials are they using?

5) What kind of support is the school getting from the Israeli Embassy, Chabad-Lubavitch, etc.?

Oh here we go...so predictable.

If you were truly interested in understanding this, Sela explains that Hebrew is an entrance point to learning other Semitic languages such as Arabic and Amharic. They also say that modern Hebrew is a relatively easy language to learn as it was designed to be taught to large groups of recent immigrants to Israel.

Sela is an excellent school. No one is making your children go there, so calm down. I think the more language options, the better.

You didn't address any of PP's points.

Your arguments are dumb. Hebrew is an "entrance point" to Arabic and Amharic, and it is an "easy" language? That is your justification for a Hebrew immersion school in DC? Give me a break. Besides, Spanish and Mandarin are actually useful endpoint languages spoken by hundreds of millions of people and, at least, Spanish is easy for English speakers.

Who cares that you think Sela is an excellent school? Why are DC taxpayer dollars funding a Hebrew school instead of something that appeals to a much broader group of students and would be a lot more useful?

You sound defensive. Maybe you should "calm down" and address the points made earlier instead of resorting to weak arguments and ad hominem attacks.

I can express my opinion about Sela just as you can. Yours is not the only view.

As to Hebrew -- first off, the utility of learning a language is not limited to the number of people who speak it, although that is certainly a significant factor. You mentioned Greek earlier, and it is similar to Hebrew in usage (there about one million more Greek speakers). And I think a Greek immersion program, if available, would be a terrific option as well, given the historic and cultural importance of Greece.

The more language options the better. To me, that means not opposing the one Hebrew option, which no one is required to choose, but rather supporting additional options as well, beyond the multiple Spanish, French, and Mandarin programs that currently exist.

There is more about your rage over Hebrew that I'm not going to say here, and you would never acknowledge it anyway. So I've said my piece and am done.

NP and while I have no rage over Hebrew or whatever you are saying, I disagree with your premise that the more immersion options the better. I think we need to focus on expanding the number of spots for languages that will provide most useful in the future to the most students. I would say the top of that list is Spanish and would much rather DC expand immersion Spanish options and catch up a bit with much of the world where second languages are taught from early on.

+1, agree on Spanish. I would also argue that immigration patterns in this area would argue for French, Hindi, or Arabic immersion well before Hebrew. The argument for Hebrew feels strained at best. I don't get it.

Surely you know that there are multiple French options already, in addition to Spanish and Mandarin. And no one is arguing against teaching additional languages. Arabic in particular is quite hard to acquire as an adult (I've tried) so may also be a good option for early immersion. There is someone on this thread (or maybe two people) who is/are particularly angry that Hebrew is a option. They tend to shift argument and justifications. They are clearly not familiar with Sela, don't have kids there, and probably don't know any parents of kids there. Yet they dismiss more informed views. Whatever their underlying agenda, they are triggered by this one school, which is doing well. Sad.

NP but you seem the one who is triggered. You seem incredibly defensive about your decision to send your kids to a Hebrew immersion school.

The fact is that the vast majority of students at Sela are below grade-level in both math and English. I am not sure how Hebrew will be that useful to them if they can't even meet DCPS grade-level standards in math and English. You really think that they can just move to Tel Aviv and get hired if they don't know even basic math or English?

Please stop attacking DC parents and taxpayers who think that a Hebrew immersion charter school in DC doesn't make much sense. DCPS should be bringing kids up to speed in math and English instead of focusing on teaching them a niche language that they will rarely, if ever, use.

This is one of the funniest sentences I've read on this website. How dare she!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

Typo PP not OP

Nice try, but no. I’m pointing out the obvious fact that people who go on at great length about the changes that DCPS needs to make (tracking - despite the explicitly racist history of tracking in DCPS, expelling kids with discipline issues — despite the mountain of evidence demonstrating that expulsion and suspension are meted out differently for identical behaviors between white and black students, “ending social promotion” despite everything that the evidence tells us about the effects of retention) without ever giving a second’s thought to the children that their pet policies would negatively impact — seem like sociopaths. And as the PP who proudly proclaimed while advocating for many racially problematic policies that they are “glad white people are done apologizing” demonstrates, it’s pretty clear where the posters on this board stand — screw the poor kids, I want my kid to have the best of everything.

Everyone wants better for their kids. That’s not the issue. School safety needs to be improved , that’s not the issue. Kids should be challenged, advocating for that is not the issue. What IS an issue is demanding those things and ignoring or — as DCUM posters love to do — denigrating poor kids while doing so (Google “thugs” and DCUM is you doubt this).

And no, I am the product of very troubled public schools (on par with the worst of DC) and the parent of DCPS K-12 kids, so sorry to disappoint, but I’m not PP’s stereotype of a hypocritical liberal.

Nowhere in any of the direct responses to you did anyone denigrate poor kids.

Everything above that you are saying - better academics, better safety, and I’ll add better consequences for behaviors ARE the issue in DCPS. Frankly it’s a sh*tshow. DCPS ignores meeting the needs of the higher performing kids and why you have parents frustrated and leaving the system completely.

As to the poor kids, how is that working out with no tracking, no suspensions, and socially promoting? Kids verbally abusing teachers, hitting teachers, fights every day, chaos daily affecting staff and other students and no one learning anything. Kids who do no work or miss a crazy amount of school who get passed along and graduate who can barely read or do math past 3rd grade level and do what after getting a useless HS diploma worth nothing? The truth of the matter is what DCPS is doing is not working.

You talk about ignoring poor kids. DCPS doesn’t do that but you know what they do well IS ignore the higher achieving kids. So families with options leave the system. And who is left behind and how is that working out for DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

Schools with at-risk students receive additional funding for those students and if there is a "high concentration" of at-risk, they receive even more funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

Typo PP not OP

Nice try, but no. I’m pointing out the obvious fact that people who go on at great length about the changes that DCPS needs to make (tracking - despite the explicitly racist history of tracking in DCPS, expelling kids with discipline issues — despite the mountain of evidence demonstrating that expulsion and suspension are meted out differently for identical behaviors between white and black students, “ending social promotion” despite everything that the evidence tells us about the effects of retention) without ever giving a second’s thought to the children that their pet policies would negatively impact — seem like sociopaths. And as the PP who proudly proclaimed while advocating for many racially problematic policies that they are “glad white people are done apologizing” demonstrates, it’s pretty clear where the posters on this board stand — screw the poor kids, I want my kid to have the best of everything.

Everyone wants better for their kids. That’s not the issue. School safety needs to be improved , that’s not the issue. Kids should be challenged, advocating for that is not the issue. What IS an issue is demanding those things and ignoring or — as DCUM posters love to do — denigrating poor kids while doing so (Google “thugs” and DCUM is you doubt this).

And no, I am the product of very troubled public schools (on par with the worst of DC) and the parent of DCPS K-12 kids, so sorry to disappoint, but I’m not PP’s stereotype of a hypocritical liberal.

No one has been able to come up with a better alternative to tracking suspension and ultimately kids need consequences for discipline issues. If we know there were past problems with tracking, why not educate school teachers, counselors and administrators to make sure it is not done in a racist way. All students should be eligible for tracking depending on their academic performance. I guess the problem is that, for whatever reason, often white kids in DC perform better in the classroom so tracking will lead to more white kids in advanced classes which is considered unacceptable by some people. I still refuse to accept that the answer is to push everyone down. Why not advocate for smaller classes (max size 20) so that teachers have a chance to work more with small groups of students. And now someone is going to trot out that class size does not matter which is a ridiculous assertion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

Schools with at-risk students receive additional funding for those students and if there is a "high concentration" of at-risk, they receive even more funding.

Are you really that naive that you think the funding is enough or that you don’t know about the massive corruption in DCPS, the boated central office or that they love to divert money to whatever BS new program of the year that is useless or whatever else.

Go talk to the principal and staff at these majority at risk schools if they have enough funding to support the kids. I mean they don’t even have enough damn toilet paper. Where exactly is all the money going?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

Schools with at-risk students receive additional funding for those students and if there is a "high concentration" of at-risk, they receive even more funding.

Are you really that naive that you think the funding is enough or that you don’t know about the massive corruption in DCPS, the boated central office or that they love to divert money to whatever BS new program of the year that is useless or whatever else.

Go talk to the principal and staff at these majority at risk schools if they have enough funding to support the kids. I mean they don’t even have enough damn toilet paper. Where exactly is all the money going?

No, not naive at all. I'm at one of the greater than 20% schools. Just not sure what you mean by anything more than 20% "impacts resources for all students." I agree that even though more resources are received, funding is not enough and is not always be deployed effectively.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The cynical view - I think this is a factor, though even the supporters of immerson programs try to deny it to others, as well as to themselves - if you have a program like this you (1) privilege those who can speak the language on one side in terms of difficulty of participation in the program, if not technically in terms of the DC lottery terms and (2) allow those who get comfortable with the program to create an in-culture; and (3) this is most important and most strenuously denied by the promoters - it allows the program to REJECT those who can't stick with the language program or NOT ALLOW ENTRY after "time frame X" by students outside the program. That means a language-focuse school gradually sheds students who can't hack it, and that tends to allow the program to be more exclusive and academic.

Most importantly, the students that schools (and parents) don't want are the homeless or near-homeless children of the uneducated and shiftless who are commonly behavior and academic problem children. Having a schooling requirement - the language - that requires more than just showing up at several stages: lottery, attendance, testing, year-to-year progress - functions to not allow these true loser students to continue to be in your kids' schools.

LOOK nobody knows how to deal with these kids and they make it hard for families to want to go to the "comprehensive" schools of last resort for their kids' schooling when they know disruptive losers will be their kids' fellow students.

But trying to keep your kids segregated from those kids is definitely part of the attraction of these language schools, the oddest of which probably remains this revived language of 1 country/10 million people that has no obvious use besides moving to Tel Aviv or passing your bar mitzvah.

SO, some people will deny what I'm talking about, but generally there's more truth in the BS I spewed above than they want to admit.

I don't personally have a problem with Sela or a Hebrew immersion in DC, and would send my kid there, but I think this poster is speaking some real truth about not just Sela, but the appeal of both charters and especially language immersion in DC. It's not the only reason these schools are in high demand, but it's absolutely a huge part of it, and people who deny it on it's face are being disingenuous.

But people don't like to admit this because most parents with kids at immersion charters in DC are progressives who pay lip service to equity and will talk up the equity programs at their school. But their children will never set foot in a public school in DC (whether DCPS or charter) with a large population of at risk and/or unhoused kids. And that's not an accident.

I’m a minority and there are a good percentage of minorities (black and Hispanic) at our Spanish immersion charter.

We wanted language immersion for our high performing kid because he needed more challenge in school. School comes easy for him especially in DC where there is no G & T. He is not gifted but scores very high on standardized testing.

Most parents in DC are liberals and very comfortable with diversity.

The reason why at risk kids don’t do well in language immersion is because they don’t have support. A generalization but true that the majority of them don’t do well academically and are below grade level in ELA. So why would you put them in language immersion when they are struggling with the basics and get 0 or 50% less ELA instruction?? Learning another language is a bonus but not necessary. Learning English is a necessity. If my kid was struggling in ELA, I would pull him out of immersion.

Language immersion schools are a niche. It’s not for everyone and why you have non-immersion schools. Parents looking at the immersion charters are looking not only at the language but also at the academic performing cohort.

Nothing you say disproves the PP's point though. You are actually proving the point.

You are a "minority" parent at an immersion school. But not at risk. And then you explain that at risk kids don't do well in immersion because immersion requires at-home support and at risk kids don't get it. So if you want a school that doesn't have a lot of at risk kids, it is conveniently easy to accomplish this with an immersion charter.

Also, you say that liberal parents in DC are "comfortable" with diversity. I'd argue that like and want diversity, but only a certain kind. Progressive parents in DC (and I am one) love a school with a lot of diversity in race, country of origin, religion sexuality, etc. All of that diversity contributes to their progressive bonafides. But the one area quality where progressives in DC actually prefer LESS diversity? Socioeconomics. That's why immersion charters are so desirable. Their kids will go to school with a high-SES but otherwise diverse cohort, satisfying their desire for diversity while avoiding the negative aspects of true diversity, where some kids simply need a LOT more resources in order to have anything close to resembling equitable access.

If you don't understand these dynamics in the DC charter/lottery system, I think you are being purposefully obtuse. And I say that as a parent whose kids have attended a socioeconomically diverse DCPS and a racially "diverse" charter (where most kids are from UMC families). Progressives in DC talk the talk but mostly do not walk the walk.

These are such basic talking points that have been repeated on this board for more than decade. Congrats on parroting what someone smarter than you said a long time ago.

Parents with high performing kids want rigor in academics that will meet their kids needs. DCPS doesn’t track with G & T, has awfully low standards, and socially promote.

So if SES tracks with academic performance, then hell yes, I want less at risk kids at the school and a higher performing peer group so more challenging curriculum can be taught instead of dumbing things down. And I have no problem saying to PP above or anyone else.

The lack of self awareness of these posters is amazing. PP is saying “I don’t care that DCPS is serving the people of DC who actually use the schools. I want programming that excludes those vulnerable people so that my kid can get what I want for them.”

PP, you are a sociopath and a horrible person. Please move away from DC.

Nope, not a sociopath at all. Until DCPS cares about ALL the kids in DC and provide appropriate education to meet All the kid’s needs and not just some, tons of families will do what they can to get what their kid needs.

But hey, feel free to send your kid to majority at risk schools. Get back to us when you kid attends Cardozo, Eastern, or whatever.

When you say “ I want less at risk kids at the school”, you sound like a sociopath. You are saying “I want the public school to affirmatively work to exclude poor and vulnerable people.” That shows a sociopathic lack of empathy for children who are in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why I think you are a sociopath. Nothing you wrote changes that impression.

This is disingenuous and I think you know it. No one is saying "less at risk". What they are saying is schools need to be willing to offer programming for those at the top of a class. Since this is a zero sum game that probably means crowding out some at the bottom. Here, context matters. You seem to be suggesting that a school like Eastern with PARCC proficiency in the single digits should not be offering programming to kids who are proficient because that would crowd out kids who are. That would be different than a school with zero at-risk wanting to exclude any at-risk.

What is more problematic than your approach is that this seems to be how DCPS does in fact approach public education. You are also creating a false construct by asserting that anyone who wants advanced programming and for schools to cater to their own kids' needs "lacks empathy" for anyone else. By that faulty logic people who have IEPs who object to AP or honors classes "lack empathy", right?

“ I want less at risk kids at the school” Is literally a direct quotation from the post I was responding to.

Context means everything.

Here at risk is a proxy for poor performance. Poor performance in DCPS means dumbing down the curriculum which is the fault and failure of DCPS. So families want schools with less at risk kids due to academic performance and peer group not because of anything personal against the kids.

ALL schools have at risk kids, DCPS and charters. The difference is the percentages. The magic number is 20%. Anything more than that impacts resources for all students and impacts academics.

OP is one of those insufferable people who is arguing that any parent who want better academics so their kids needs can also be met lack any empathy and are sociopaths by wanting less at risk kids. She is exactly why the system will never change because she argues that those kids are the only ones DCPS should serve.

Typo PP not OP

Nice try, but no. I’m pointing out the obvious fact that people who go on at great length about the changes that DCPS needs to make (tracking - despite the explicitly racist history of tracking in DCPS, expelling kids with discipline issues — despite the mountain of evidence demonstrating that expulsion and suspension are meted out differently for identical behaviors between white and black students, “ending social promotion” despite everything that the evidence tells us about the effects of retention) without ever giving a second’s thought to the children that their pet policies would negatively impact — seem like sociopaths. And as the PP who proudly proclaimed while advocating for many racially problematic policies that they are “glad white people are done apologizing” demonstrates, it’s pretty clear where the posters on this board stand — screw the poor kids, I want my kid to have the best of everything.

Everyone wants better for their kids. That’s not the issue. School safety needs to be improved , that’s not the issue. Kids should be challenged, advocating for that is not the issue. What IS an issue is demanding those things and ignoring or — as DCUM posters love to do — denigrating poor kids while doing so (Google “thugs” and DCUM is you doubt this).

And no, I am the product of very troubled public schools (on par with the worst of DC) and the parent of DCPS K-12 kids, so sorry to disappoint, but I’m not PP’s stereotype of a hypocritical liberal.

Nowhere in any of the direct responses to you did anyone denigrate poor kids.

Everything above that you are saying - better academics, better safety, and I’ll add better consequences for behaviors ARE the issue in DCPS. Frankly it’s a sh*tshow. DCPS ignores meeting the needs of the higher performing kids and why you have parents frustrated and leaving the system completely.

As to the poor kids, how is that working out with no tracking, no suspensions, and socially promoting? Kids verbally abusing teachers, hitting teachers, fights every day, chaos daily affecting staff and other students and no one learning anything. Kids who do no work or miss a crazy amount of school who get passed along and graduate who can barely read or do math past 3rd grade level and do what after getting a useless HS diploma worth nothing? The truth of the matter is what DCPS is doing is not working.

You talk about ignoring poor kids. DCPS doesn’t do that but you know what they do well IS ignore the higher achieving kids. So families with options leave the system. And who is left behind and how is that working out for DCPS.

This. 100% this.

Seems to me the basic premise of the person to whom you reply is that only black people are allowed to demand better schools, advanced coursework and consequences for bad behavior. He types hundreds of words to say, "I don't necessarily disagree that changes need to be made, but since you are (presumed to be) white and UMC it is racist when you make these suggestions."

[Anonymous]

Language immersion programs have been criticized as providing a horse and pony show for language learning
I do support language immersion and wish there was more programs like this
What I am surprised by is the choice of language. I also get the feeling that non Jewish would at most be just tolerated at best
I am also unsure how knowledge of Hebrew would assist in the job market. Language learning tends to follow market need for the said language

Knowledge of German, French, Spanish and Mandarin will always be in demand. I understand the need for Latin too
Hebrew seems more like a religious appeal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is all vaguely anti semitic. Are PPs against Yu Ying and Mundo Verde also? No? Just schools that teach Hebrew... hmmmmm....

Sure, way less people speak Hebrew. But isn't that for the parent to determine whether or not that matters to their family?

People are not against Spanish language immersion because hundreds of millions of people speak Spanish and it is the second most spoken language in this country. People are not against Yu Ying because a billion people speak Mandarin. 10 million people in the world speak Hebrew. And most of those people also speak English. That’s the critique. I would not assume it’s anti-semitism.