Is Brent the best school in Capitol hill?

[Anonymous]

I think a problem of having no GT programs to speak of in DC, is that 80% of middle class parents seem to think their children are GT. If we were in Arlington or FCPS, people would know if the school defined their kid as GT. It allows for a lot of delusions. There are a lot of bright kids who are not intellectually gifted.

Honors classes however at Hobson would benefit a lot of higher acheiving kids. I think gifted programs would be great for bright kids who are not getting the adeequate academic support at home (among others)

[Anonymous]

G&T is its own category. G&T isn't just a matter of opinion, of some parent saying "Oh, my little Johnny is just so bright and talented", in most places it has historically been quantitative, such as IQ or percentile in performance. Even if you just went with pure statistics and the bell curve that you would find in any population, and you for example considered the top 5% of students in DCPS and charters for G&T programs you'd easily end up with almost 4,000 students in that top percentile.

So, the numbers are indeed there, robust G&T programs are indeed warranted, it's 4,000 students who would otherwise be have their needs not met.

So let's stop pretending there aren't any G&T students in the district.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think a problem of having no GT programs to speak of in DC, is that 80% of middle class parents seem to think their children are GT. If we were in Arlington or FCPS, people would know if the school defined their kid as GT. It allows for a lot of delusions. There are a lot of bright kids who are not intellectually gifted.

Honors classes however at Hobson would benefit a lot of higher acheiving kids. I think gifted programs would be great for bright kids who are not getting the adeequate academic support at home (among others)

I know a few families with kids in GT programs in FCPS and these kids are smart/very bright but I wouldn't say "gifted" at least based on what the parents did to get their kids into the program. Same for my experience in NYC. I lot of prepping kids to do well on the exams to get in. Same thing would happen in DC, parents of advanced kids figuring out how to get their kids in G&T programs so their kids can be challenged (which is not necessarily a bad thing).

[Anonymous]

I know a few families with kids in GT programs in FCPS and these kids are smart/very bright but I wouldn't say "gifted" at least based on what the parents did to get their kids into the program. Same for my experience in NYC. I lot of prepping kids to do well on the exams to get in. Same thing would happen in DC, parents of advanced kids figuring out how to get their kids in G&T programs so their kids can be challenged (which is not necessarily a bad thing).

AA parent who was in a GT program. Just because high-SES families figure out how to get their bright, but not necessarily gifted, kids in doesn't mean that low-SES children don't benefit. The school system simply needs to go the extra mile to identify and include poor kids, as in my case. The most treasured dimension of the experience was simply having many high-SES peers who exposed me to a big, fun world of travel, enrichment activities, and career and lifestyle choices I wouldn't have been aware of otherwise. By the time I was in middle school, the program had me thinking, hey, if these guys can aspire to attend top colleges and travel, so can I, they aren't smarter/better than I am. I hate the way educator after educator in DCPs and DC Charter has bought into the notion that low-SES kids don't need high-SES peers to excel and thrive in MS and HS. The system seems to knock itself out to find and hire such people, although they're wrong. At least at Brent, the low-SES kids, including the Bolling Air Force base crowd, are having their world opened, as I did.

[Anonymous]

+1. They are wrong. They're also running the MS and H schools, which stinks.

[Anonymous]

I don't know if Brent is the only best, but it is one of the best. And it's a pretty good school at that.

[Anonymous]

+2. Some very inexperienced ed reformers in this town don't want high SES families in their schools. I can't believe the way some of these schools are run.

Anonymous wrote:+1. They are wrong. They're also running the MS and H schools, which stinks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:+2. Some very inexperienced ed reformers in this town don't want high SES families in their schools. I can't believe the way some of these schools are run.

Anonymous wrote:+1. They are wrong. They're also running the MS and H schools, which stinks.

Anyone who can avoid DCPS, does avoid DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I know a few families with kids in GT programs in FCPS and these kids are smart/very bright but I wouldn't say "gifted" at least based on what the parents did to get their kids into the program. Same for my experience in NYC. I lot of prepping kids to do well on the exams to get in. Same thing would happen in DC, parents of advanced kids figuring out how to get their kids in G&T programs so their kids can be challenged (which is not necessarily a bad thing).

AA parent who was in a GT program. Just because high-SES families figure out how to get their bright, but not necessarily gifted, kids in doesn't mean that low-SES children don't benefit. The school system simply needs to go the extra mile to identify and include poor kids, as in my case. The most treasured dimension of the experience was simply having many high-SES peers who exposed me to a big, fun world of travel, enrichment activities, and career and lifestyle choices I wouldn't have been aware of otherwise. By the time I was in middle school, the program had me thinking, hey, if these guys can aspire to attend top colleges and travel, so can I, they aren't smarter/better than I am. I hate the way educator after educator in DCPs and DC Charter has bought into the notion that low-SES kids don't need high-SES peers to excel and thrive in MS and HS. The system seems to knock itself out to find and hire such people, although they're wrong. At least at Brent, the low-SES kids, including the Bolling Air Force base crowd, are having their world opened, as I did.



Statistically speaking, there's a potential pool of G&T students numbering in the thousands in DC. That definitely merits building the infrastructure for it, that definitely merits making that option available to high-performing students of all SES brackets. There's absolutely no valid reason why their needs should not be met.

[Anonymous]

Money can purchase preparation for any test. Sometimes it's explicit, via prep courses and supplemental classes, and sometimes it's implicit, via parents with doctoral-level vocabularies and travel opportunities. The educational psychology literature indicates that before age 7, IQ tests don't have predictive validity. They just measure SES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Money can purchase preparation for any test. Sometimes it's explicit, via prep courses and supplemental classes, and sometimes it's implicit, via parents with doctoral-level vocabularies and travel opportunities. The educational psychology literature indicates that before age 7, IQ tests don't have predictive validity. They just measure SES.

Brent parent having a hard time imagining G/T education developing in the District in this decade in a city increasingly polarized by race and class. The reason: lack of leadership. Rhee sounded serious about G/T, and might have had the guts and vision to develop programs if she'd lasted, starting sensibly with an ES academy in a poor neighborhood, one with a city-wide draw (she outined plans at several 2010 press conferences).

Henderson ducks the subject. This is a shame because there are tried and tested methods for identifying gifted low-SES kids for inclusion in G/T programs. DC privates already use them. Not unusually, low-SES kids do better in the long-run than high-SES peers because testing gifted as a poor kid tends to mean you're truly gifted. Genius springs up in odd places. The Ivies know this, and knock themselves out to find and reward low-SES applicants who can do the work. I attended one, on a Pell Grant, and, though I am no genius, I remember a kind dean saying "we didn't take you because we're running a charity, we took you because you are more likely to give back to us eventually than better-off students; call us venture capitalists investing in a start-up."

[Anonymous]

Get outside the Brent District and Upper NW and you'll find few PS parents in favor of GT ES ed, or even programs for ES advanced learners going beyond the limiting differentiated learning within the classroom model. Even most Cluster and Maury PTA parents reject them for now. We're at Brent because there are enough of the like-minded in the community for us to avoid the time-onsuming headache of struggling to win administrator, teacher and PTA hearts and minds. Tweak a few things and Brent will be great for almost all the kids up to 5th (if parents stay) within a few years. Good leadership has been key. High housing values just as key. Not sure if we're snobs, pragmatists or a little of both, but we're glad we bought near Turtle Park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Get outside the Brent District and Upper NW and you'll find few PS parents in favor of GT ES ed, or even programs for ES advanced learners going beyond the limiting differentiated learning within the classroom model. Even most Cluster and Maury PTA parents reject them for now. We're at Brent because there are enough of the like-minded in the community for us to avoid the time-onsuming headache of struggling to win administrator, teacher and PTA hearts and minds. Tweak a few things and Brent will be great for almost all the kids up to 5th (if parents stay) within a few years. Good leadership has been key. High housing values just as key. Not sure if we're snobs, pragmatists or a little of both, but we're glad we bought near Turtle Park.

Why is that?

[Anonymous]

[b]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get outside the Brent District and Upper NW and you'll find few PS parents in favor of GT ES ed, or even programs for ES advanced learners going beyond the limiting differentiated learning within the classroom model. Even most Cluster and Maury PTA parents reject them for now.

[/b]

Why is that?

Brent PTA parent here. The Hill is still brimming with white arch liberals who buy into the concept that elitism in schools in the form of programs for advanced learners, beyond mild differentiation in the classroom, is philosophically offensive and unnecessary. Also, they prioritize other PTA projects at schools, like building good libraries and playgrounds, and changing out weak principals and teachers.

The irony is that these folks, not the most practical of people, have a strong tendency to go into reactive mode somewhere between 1st and 3rd grade. They tend to leave the system once they realize that not only are their kids aren't challenged, they're spending a lot of time on test prep/testing from which they don't benefit, and teachers are focued on crowd control, dealing with disruptive low-SES kids (it only takes a handful to monopolize an educator's time/attention). Other, less liberal parents, generally white, don't want the hassle of being accused of racism in asking for special treatment for their advanced learners. The fallout from Brent's push, in 2009-2010, to add middle school grades on a temporary basis brought a flood of criticism in this vein, a draining experience for those of us involved. Many of these parents simply try DCPS from year to year, expecting to hit the wall before middle school, so aren't motivated to lobby for systemic change, yeoman's work in a city where public schools haven't served a large middle-class cohort in decades.

[Anonymous]

+1. True and not the most inspiring story. But there is more and more momentum to accomodate advanced learners (read run of the mill high-SES kids and a few, odds-defying low-SES kids) at Brent, Watkins and Maury, and Tyler SI is essentially a G/T program by another name. Brent is merely ahead of the curve.