When should we listen to those small, nagging doubts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child is in a private school and I don't think they are challenging him. It's really not a clear question of public vs private or title one vs not title one or even class size. It's whether the particular teachers are managing to differentiate enough to keep all the kids challenged and supported. You could ask the teachers what they do to make sure everyone is challenged, you can ask your child if he/she is learning new things all the time. You can look at the CCSS to see what students at your child's grade level are expected to know. A pp was right that third grade is considered a time when most kids should have caught up to grade level, despite uneven early development.

+1. When we made the move to private for 1st, kid was ahead in both reading in math coming from DCPS. I think the early grades are often pretty play-based in many privates. Also, I think a lot of it in public or private is the luck of the draw--the teacher your kid gets in a given year, the classroom dynamics, etc.

Agree! I prefer a play-based Kindergarten. We moved from private to DCPS because DCPS accelerates/differentiates much better than private in upper grades. But we were shocked at how nice the kids are! There is zero mean girl stuff unlike private (DD is in 5th and the only white kid in her grade). It is such a positive environment. I wasn’t aware of just how toxic the private school girls’ culture is.

PP here, and this was pretty much the same for our DCPS, also majority minority. Ugh, not surprised about the mean girl stuff, and hope it doesn't happen later at current school. However, it's a school with relatively high turnover as people move for international assignments, something like 17% each year--hoping that protects somewhat against the insularity that can come in privates where everyone has known each other since pre-K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, find a middle road but don't blame parents for the rise of what you term unnecessarily homogenized schools. DC politicians and school system leaders made the decision to stuck with a neighborhood school system through the decades, even as a number of other large US cities jettisoned theirs (San Fran and Boston being the most notable examples). They also made the decision not to create or fund formal GT programs that could have motivated high SES parents to enroll their kids in certain T1 schools in large numbers, and stick with these programs.

DC parents buy pricey real estate to access strong by-right schools seem to have done their research. We bought in-boundary for Brent mainly for strong math for a math gifted child. We found that he would have ready access to math classes (led by a teacher and serving same-age peers) two years ahead of grade level from 3rd grade. We checked around and couldn't find another school EotP offering math even a year above grade level that wasn't taught by a computer. Robust PTA fundraising provides, um, great opportunities.

Your attitude depresses me. It begins from the position that rich families make the best classmates. It also suggests that teachers in other schools only teach to the slowest kids and by extension they aren’t good teachers. Get out of your snob bubble.

Your myopia isn't a ray of sunshine either. I'm not white and grew up poor in NYC, where I was served by stellar GT programs from K-12, enabling me to attend an Ivy on massive fi aid. Not much hope for the likes of me in DCPS.

At Brent, the PTA pays for a seriously good after-school tutoring program for kids who struggle, head and shoulders above what DCPS would have provided. The snob bubble has its uses.

Few families in our neighborhood are "rich." Most public school parents work for Uncle Sam or other outfits which don't pay terribly well. The crux of the problem is a vast high SES-low SES achievement/education gap in a poorly run city, with a school system that doesn't look out for ES and MS advanced learners across the socio-economic spectrum. As a New Yorker, I find this "attitude" on the part of DCPS' leadership depressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even so, white guilt and liberal prerogatives have a way of fueling naive optimism about school quality in DC's gentrifying neighborhoods. Kids often pay by jumping around between schools. I know well-meaning DCPS families who've gone with as many as four different public schools between PreS3 and 5th grade. Better to listen to those nagging doubts upfront. Hint: make an elementary school plan promoting stability.

Conversely, conservative hubris and racism have a way of fueling alarmist pessimism about school quality in DC’s neighborhood schools. Kids often pay by being sheltered in unnecessarily homogenized schools. I know well-meaning DCPS families who have helicoptered their kids and deprived them of great opportunities. Better to listen to the voice of reason up front. Hint: do more research and find out what’s really going on at the schools, then don’t listen to neighbors who just assume.

This is because people are insecure about the future. There is economic insecurity with the disappearing middle class. It is this overwhelming fear that caused people to vote for Trump. Many of my white liberal friends avoid low performing schools because deep down they worry that poor is communicable. It’s really not a Republican or Democratic thing. It’s a white thing.

Oh cmon it's not a white thing it's a common sense thing. If anything it's dumb naive white thing to give high poverty schools a chance to begin with. Most higher-income blacks asians and hispanics aren't stupiid and know to avoid these schools.

[Anonymous]

THIS. +1000. Common sense is right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child is in a private school and I don't think they are challenging him. It's really not a clear question of public vs private or title one vs not title one or even class size. It's whether the particular teachers are managing to differentiate enough to keep all the kids challenged and supported. You could ask the teachers what they do to make sure everyone is challenged, you can ask your child if he/she is learning new things all the time. You can look at the CCSS to see what students at your child's grade level are expected to know. A pp was right that third grade is considered a time when most kids should have caught up to grade level, despite uneven early development.

+1. When we made the move to private for 1st, kid was ahead in both reading in math coming from DCPS. I think the early grades are often pretty play-based in many privates. Also, I think a lot of it in public or private is the luck of the draw--the teacher your kid gets in a given year, the classroom dynamics, etc.

Agree! I prefer a play-based Kindergarten. We moved from private to DCPS because DCPS accelerates/differentiates much better than private in upper grades. But we were shocked at how nice the kids are! There is zero mean girl stuff unlike private (DD is in 5th and the only white kid in her grade). It is such a positive environment. I wasn’t aware of just how toxic the private school girls’ culture is.

PP here, and this was pretty much the same for our DCPS, also majority minority. Ugh, not surprised about the mean girl stuff, and hope it doesn't happen later at current school. However, it's a school with relatively high turnover as people move for international assignments, something like 17% each year--hoping that protects somewhat against the insularity that can come in privates where everyone has known each other since pre-K.

Please, our well-respected private sees a minority of parents come and go, mainly because this a somewhat transient government town. Lawmakers get voted out and they and their staffers leave town, parents relocate for new jobs. Also, the school doesn't prove a good fit for some families, so they leave in search of a better fit. You don't know what you're talking about. Mean girl stuff happens at every school as kids get older. The school's response is what matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child is in a private school and I don't think they are challenging him. It's really not a clear question of public vs private or title one vs not title one or even class size. It's whether the particular teachers are managing to differentiate enough to keep all the kids challenged and supported. You could ask the teachers what they do to make sure everyone is challenged, you can ask your child if he/she is learning new things all the time. You can look at the CCSS to see what students at your child's grade level are expected to know. A pp was right that third grade is considered a time when most kids should have caught up to grade level, despite uneven early development.

+1. When we made the move to private for 1st, kid was ahead in both reading in math coming from DCPS. I think the early grades are often pretty play-based in many privates. Also, I think a lot of it in public or private is the luck of the draw--the teacher your kid gets in a given year, the classroom dynamics, etc.

Agree! I prefer a play-based Kindergarten. We moved from private to DCPS because DCPS accelerates/differentiates much better than private in upper grades. But we were shocked at how nice the kids are! There is zero mean girl stuff unlike private (DD is in 5th and the only white kid in her grade). It is such a positive environment. I wasn’t aware of just how toxic the private school girls’ culture is.

PP here, and this was pretty much the same for our DCPS, also majority minority. Ugh, not surprised about the mean girl stuff, and hope it doesn't happen later at current school. However, it's a school with relatively high turnover as people move for international assignments, something like 17% each year--hoping that protects somewhat against the insularity that can come in privates where everyone has known each other since pre-K.

Please, our well-respected private sees a minority of parents come and go, mainly because this a somewhat transient government town. Lawmakers get voted out and they and their staffers leave town, parents relocate for new jobs. Also, the school doesn't prove a good fit for some families, so they leave in search of a better fit. You don't know what you're talking about. Mean girl stuff happens at every school as kids get older. The school's response is what matters.

This has not been my experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, find a middle road but don't blame parents for the rise of what you term unnecessarily homogenized schools. DC politicians and school system leaders made the decision to stuck with a neighborhood school system through the decades, even as a number of other large US cities jettisoned theirs (San Fran and Boston being the most notable examples). They also made the decision not to create or fund formal GT programs that could have motivated high SES parents to enroll their kids in certain T1 schools in large numbers, and stick with these programs.

DC parents buy pricey real estate to access strong by-right schools seem to have done their research. We bought in-boundary for Brent mainly for strong math for a math gifted child. We found that he would have ready access to math classes (led by a teacher and serving same-age peers) two years ahead of grade level from 3rd grade. We checked around and couldn't find another school EotP offering math even a year above grade level that wasn't taught by a computer. Robust PTA fundraising provides, um, great opportunities.

Your attitude depresses me. It begins from the position that rich families make the best classmates. It also suggests that teachers in other schools only teach to the slowest kids and by extension they aren’t good teachers. Get out of your snob bubble.

This is old but the graph is instructive. Buying IB for a "top" DCPS ain't cheap. Interesting that housing in bounds for Garrison is as expensive as in bounds for Eaton. Personally I prefer Shaw for its other amenities (I hate suburban lifestyle) but I'm sure others disagree.
Your myopia isn't a ray of sunshine either. I'm not white and grew up poor in NYC, where I was served by stellar GT programs from K-12, enabling me to attend an Ivy on massive fi aid. Not much hope for the likes of me in DCPS.

At Brent, the PTA pays for a seriously good after-school tutoring program for kids who struggle, head and shoulders above what DCPS would have provided. The snob bubble has its uses.

Few families in our neighborhood are "rich." Most public school parents work for Uncle Sam or other outfits which don't pay terribly well. The crux of the problem is a vast high SES-low SES achievement/education gap in a poorly run city, with a school system that doesn't look out for ES and MS advanced learners across the socio-economic spectrum. As a New Yorker, I find this "attitude" on the part of DCPS' leadership depressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, find a middle road but don't blame parents for the rise of what you term unnecessarily homogenized schools. DC politicians and school system leaders made the decision to stuck with a neighborhood school system through the decades, even as a number of other large US cities jettisoned theirs (San Fran and Boston being the most notable examples). They also made the decision not to create or fund formal GT programs that could have motivated high SES parents to enroll their kids in certain T1 schools in large numbers, and stick with these programs.

DC parents buy pricey real estate to access strong by-right schools seem to have done their research. We bought in-boundary for Brent mainly for strong math for a math gifted child. We found that he would have ready access to math classes (led by a teacher and serving same-age peers) two years ahead of grade level from 3rd grade. We checked around and couldn't find another school EotP offering math even a year above grade level that wasn't taught by a computer. Robust PTA fundraising provides, um, great opportunities.

Your attitude depresses me. It begins from the position that rich families make the best classmates. It also suggests that teachers in other schools only teach to the slowest kids and by extension they aren’t good teachers. Get out of your snob bubble.

This is old but the graph is instructive. Buying IB for a "top" DCPS ain't cheap. Interesting that housing in bounds for Garrison is as expensive as in bounds for Eaton. Personally I prefer Shaw for its other amenities (I hate suburban lifestyle) but I'm sure others disagree.
Your myopia isn't a ray of sunshine either. I'm not white and grew up poor in NYC, where I was served by stellar GT programs from K-12, enabling me to attend an Ivy on massive fi aid. Not much hope for the likes of me in DCPS.

At Brent, the PTA pays for a seriously good after-school tutoring program for kids who struggle, head and shoulders above what DCPS would have provided. The snob bubble has its uses.

Few families in our neighborhood are "rich." Most public school parents work for Uncle Sam or other outfits which don't pay terribly well. The crux of the problem is a vast high SES-low SES achievement/education gap in a poorly run city, with a school system that doesn't look out for ES and MS advanced learners across the socio-economic spectrum. As a New Yorker, I find this "attitude" on the part of DCPS' leadership depressing.

https://districtmeasured.com/2015/07/20/the-cost-of-a-guaranteed-spot-in-a-dcps-elementary-school/

Interesting graph, if a few years old. Buying in bounds for "top" schools ain't cheap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, find a middle road but don't blame parents for the rise of what you term unnecessarily homogenized schools. DC politicians and school system leaders made the decision to stuck with a neighborhood school system through the decades, even as a number of other large US cities jettisoned theirs (San Fran and Boston being the most notable examples). They also made the decision not to create or fund formal GT programs that could have motivated high SES parents to enroll their kids in certain T1 schools in large numbers, and stick with these programs.

DC parents buy pricey real estate to access strong by-right schools seem to have done their research. We bought in-boundary for Brent mainly for strong math for a math gifted child. We found that he would have ready access to math classes (led by a teacher and serving same-age peers) two years ahead of grade level from 3rd grade. We checked around and couldn't find another school EotP offering math even a year above grade level that wasn't taught by a computer. Robust PTA fundraising provides, um, great opportunities.

Your attitude depresses me. It begins from the position that rich families make the best classmates. It also suggests that teachers in other schools only teach to the slowest kids and by extension they aren’t good teachers. Get out of your snob bubble.

This is old but the graph is instructive. Buying IB for a "top" DCPS ain't cheap. Interesting that housing in bounds for Garrison is as expensive as in bounds for Eaton. Personally I prefer Shaw for its other amenities (I hate suburban lifestyle) but I'm sure others disagree.
Your myopia isn't a ray of sunshine either. I'm not white and grew up poor in NYC, where I was served by stellar GT programs from K-12, enabling me to attend an Ivy on massive fi aid. Not much hope for the likes of me in DCPS.

At Brent, the PTA pays for a seriously good after-school tutoring program for kids who struggle, head and shoulders above what DCPS would have provided. The snob bubble has its uses.

Few families in our neighborhood are "rich." Most public school parents work for Uncle Sam or other outfits which don't pay terribly well. The crux of the problem is a vast high SES-low SES achievement/education gap in a poorly run city, with a school system that doesn't look out for ES and MS advanced learners across the socio-economic spectrum. As a New Yorker, I find this "attitude" on the part of DCPS' leadership depressing.

https://districtmeasured.com/2015/07/20/the-cost-of-a-guaranteed-spot-in-a-dcps-elementary-school/

Interesting graph, if a few years old. Buying in bounds for "top" schools ain't cheap.

Brent zone four years ago was median 922k. If that's not "rich" I don't know what is. You should know that if you grew up "poor".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child is in a private school and I don't think they are challenging him. It's really not a clear question of public vs private or title one vs not title one or even class size. It's whether the particular teachers are managing to differentiate enough to keep all the kids challenged and supported. You could ask the teachers what they do to make sure everyone is challenged, you can ask your child if he/she is learning new things all the time. You can look at the CCSS to see what students at your child's grade level are expected to know. A pp was right that third grade is considered a time when most kids should have caught up to grade level, despite uneven early development.

+1. When we made the move to private for 1st, kid was ahead in both reading in math coming from DCPS. I think the early grades are often pretty play-based in many privates. Also, I think a lot of it in public or private is the luck of the draw--the teacher your kid gets in a given year, the classroom dynamics, etc.

Agree! I prefer a play-based Kindergarten. We moved from private to DCPS because DCPS accelerates/differentiates much better than private in upper grades. But we were shocked at how nice the kids are! There is zero mean girl stuff unlike private (DD is in 5th and the only white kid in her grade). It is such a positive environment. I wasn’t aware of just how toxic the private school girls’ culture is.

PP here, and this was pretty much the same for our DCPS, also majority minority. Ugh, not surprised about the mean girl stuff, and hope it doesn't happen later at current school. However, it's a school with relatively high turnover as people move for international assignments, something like 17% each year--hoping that protects somewhat against the insularity that can come in privates where everyone has known each other since pre-K.

Please, our well-respected private sees a minority of parents come and go, mainly because this a somewhat transient government town. Lawmakers get voted out and they and their staffers leave town, parents relocate for new jobs. Also, the school doesn't prove a good fit for some families, so they leave in search of a better fit. You don't know what you're talking about. Mean girl stuff happens at every school as kids get older. The school's response is what matters.

PP here, and I'm not sure why you're defensive if this doesn't describe your child's school? On the private board, there have been threads over the years that talk about schools with large numbers of "lifers," and where new kids occasionally have some difficulty breaking into these friend groups/cliques where everyone has known each other forever. Here's one such thread, post at 12:43:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/30/554895.page#8943908

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, find a middle road but don't blame parents for the rise of what you term unnecessarily homogenized schools. DC politicians and school system leaders made the decision to stuck with a neighborhood school system through the decades, even as a number of other large US cities jettisoned theirs (San Fran and Boston being the most notable examples). They also made the decision not to create or fund formal GT programs that could have motivated high SES parents to enroll their kids in certain T1 schools in large numbers, and stick with these programs.

DC parents buy pricey real estate to access strong by-right schools seem to have done their research. We bought in-boundary for Brent mainly for strong math for a math gifted child. We found that he would have ready access to math classes (led by a teacher and serving same-age peers) two years ahead of grade level from 3rd grade. We checked around and couldn't find another school EotP offering math even a year above grade level that wasn't taught by a computer. Robust PTA fundraising provides, um, great opportunities.

Your attitude depresses me. It begins from the position that rich families make the best classmates. It also suggests that teachers in other schools only teach to the slowest kids and by extension they aren’t good teachers. Get out of your snob bubble.

This is old but the graph is instructive. Buying IB for a "top" DCPS ain't cheap. Interesting that housing in bounds for Garrison is as expensive as in bounds for Eaton. Personally I prefer Shaw for its other amenities (I hate suburban lifestyle) but I'm sure others disagree.
Your myopia isn't a ray of sunshine either. I'm not white and grew up poor in NYC, where I was served by stellar GT programs from K-12, enabling me to attend an Ivy on massive fi aid. Not much hope for the likes of me in DCPS.

At Brent, the PTA pays for a seriously good after-school tutoring program for kids who struggle, head and shoulders above what DCPS would have provided. The snob bubble has its uses.

Few families in our neighborhood are "rich." Most public school parents work for Uncle Sam or other outfits which don't pay terribly well. The crux of the problem is a vast high SES-low SES achievement/education gap in a poorly run city, with a school system that doesn't look out for ES and MS advanced learners across the socio-economic spectrum. As a New Yorker, I find this "attitude" on the part of DCPS' leadership depressing.

https://districtmeasured.com/2015/07/20/the-cost-of-a-guaranteed-spot-in-a-dcps-elementary-school/

Interesting graph, if a few years old. Buying in bounds for "top" schools ain't cheap.

Brent zone four years ago was median 922k. If that's not "rich" I don't know what is. You should know that if you grew up "poor".

NP. Ten years back, when I bought a major fixer in the Brent District, one could still buy a roomy in-boundary house with potential in the 600s.

Many of us who bought before the market took off are hardly rich. We actually put crazy sweat equity into our houses to get where we are.

[Anonymous]

Don't bother, parents who can't afford to buy on Cap Hill these days don't get it and don't want to. They think that our neighborhoods were always upscale, and that our DCPS schools were always desirable.

I bought a house near Stanton Park for 300K 15 years ago, a fortune for me at the time. The place recently appraised for more than a million and I really haven't done much to improve it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Your myopia isn't a ray of sunshine either. I'm not white and grew up poor in NYC, where I was served by stellar GT programs from K-12, enabling me to attend an Ivy on massive fi aid. Not much hope for the likes of me in DCPS.

At Brent, the PTA pays for a seriously good after-school tutoring program for kids who struggle, head and shoulders above what DCPS would have provided. The snob bubble has its uses.

Few families in our neighborhood are "rich." Most public school parents work for Uncle Sam or other outfits which don't pay terribly well. The crux of the problem is a vast high SES-low SES achievement/education gap in a poorly run city, with a school system that doesn't look out for ES and MS advanced learners across the socio-economic spectrum. As a New Yorker, I find this "attitude" on the part of DCPS' leadership depressing.

Can you expand on this?
I'm not very well informed about ES and MS programs for kids who are doing well. Do many DCPS schools have options to challenge kids who are doing well?

[Anonymous]

There are no formal GT programs in DCPS. What happens is that UMC families amalgamate around a dozen elementary schools in NW and on Capitol Hill, by buying or renting real estate to gain access. Parents fund raise so that PTAs can afford to extend school budgets, enabling these schools to get more instructors in classrooms than DCPS budgets provide for. PTAs at schools primarily serving UMC students raise six figures annually, $750-$1,500 per student. With extra hands in classrooms provided by teachers aides or "floater" teachers (who move from classroom to classroom across a grade), far more differentiation can be done than with the single classroom teacher provided by DCPS from 1st-5th grades. Some of these schools offer advanced math up to two years above grade level in the upper grades.

Many UMC DCPS parents quietly privately hire tutors, or even band together to form neighborhood tutoring groups, and take advantage of all sorts of external enrichment to add challenge for advanced learners. For example, plenty of DCPS families pay for their children to attend 3-week-long Johns Hopkins CTY enrichment camps in the summer ($3,000). Some DCPS families also pay to for their children to attend weekend immersion language programs, often up in MoCo MD or out in VA.

At the middle school level, only a handful of DCPS programs offer academic tracking (bona fide advanced classes) for math, Oyster, Deal, Hardy and Stuart Hobson. Only Stuart Hobson offers a full menu of honors classes (for English, science and social studies), enrolling around 25% of students. Without test-in GT programs at the middle school level, or academic tracking other than for math, UMC parents become highly motivated to band together certain schools to ensure that advanced learners are challenged.

UMC parents without a strong IB elementary school try to lottery into a dozen strong charters. Those without a strong IB middle school try to lottery into a smaller number of charters (mainly two, Washington Latin and BASIS). Those who fail often moved to the burbs.

[Anonymous]

Yup, that's how it works. Parents' money buys GT in DCPS. Without it, no real challenge for the brightest kids.