Why is SWS so white?

[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:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

As a teacher, it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work. It's analogous to me saying that the widget production at your work isn't that hot, despite actually meeting all industry standards

What a condescending bunch of BS. So does that mean you also don't get to judge the food at a restaurant because you're not a professional chef? Please don't belittle parents when it's plain to see that the academics are not that hot.

Yes, we all know when food tastes good and when it doesn't. This is not the same. You don't like the way your child is taught math; that's different than it being taught poorly or incorrectly.

Also, using a standard of "hot or not that hot" is more fitting for MySpace that educational evaluatoon

You keep lecturing parents how stupid we are and then wonder why teachers unions have lost so much public goodwill in recent years.

When my child comes home and says that 1+1=3, am I seriously supposed to pretend that I'm too ignorant to see the academic deficiencies staring right in my face?! Am I also supposed to pretend the low standardized test scores are all wrong and that only the teachers know best?

When your upper ES student comes back and tells you 1+1=3 report back

What do you mean when you say low overall test scores? Are you talking about the fact that not all students are testing on grade level? Because, as a teacher who inherited a class with students as low as K/1 in fifth grade this year, I know that's not a legitimate standard to measure my effectiveness.

I want to add, nobody is calling you or any parent stupid. You chose to call out teachers for bad instruction and are now upset that they are defending themselves.

Once again you're obfuscating the issue. The PP teacher literally said that "it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work." The PP parents basically expressed concern about their own kids' lack of academic progress while being told by teachers to shut up because only teachers know better.

Same poster: do you think it's wrong for teachers to believe that they know better? We're experts in the field. We went to college to do this work. I think it's a fair assumption that we would know better in regards to ES math instruction

np: Teachers here love to tell patents that they are not qualified to have opinions. However, the truth is that a lot of parents also have relevant expertise. Some parents are or were teachers; some have expertise in the field; some work for educational suppliers; some have extensive experience working with children; etc etc.

But also, the mentality on DCUM is a lot more type A than average.

Curious if the PP's determination of their kid being below grade level was based on fall iready scores? My kid is always "behind" grade level on fall iready and ahead by end of the year. I swear that test's fall percentiles are designed to make parents panic, then kids seem "improved" by the end of the year - oh look, iready worked to get your kid to grade level!

I - ready BOY scores are shared based on where students need to be at EOY. Being "behind" grade level is the age appropriate place

Exactly. But it isn't made clear so we also panicked when our kid eas "behind" grade level and had a low percentile score at BOY and magically they were at grade level and 90th percentile by the winter assessment. That's why I asked if the parent's determinate of their kid being behind was BOY iready.

Makes sense - thanks for clarifying!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

Just because you and your friends need to take your kids to Mathnasium doesn't mean SWS isn't doing a good job at teaching math. It just means that your kid and your friends' kids need extra support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been discussed on numerous prior threads. But part of the reason has to do with the legacy of proximity preference from when SWS first broke off from Peabody.

Another factor is that the Goding building is not near major transportation hubs, so it’s more inaccessible than other options and thus is preferred by the adjacent (predominantly white) community.

I don’t think a temporary swing space situation (in the middle of a pandemic) is enough to reverse this factor.

That said I believe the population is shifting a bit over time (to become more black), though I don’t have statistics on that.

Thank you for the reply, I didn’t know about the history with Peabody or the proximity preference, that does explain a lot.

I looked for a thread on this issue but SWS gets mentioned a lot on this forum and didn’t see anything on point.

I don’t think proximities and Peabody can explain it anymore.

I would disagree. We didn't consider SWS because it's too hard to get to. Our children are white, but most who travel from NE are not, and are less likely to choose SWS over the many excellent options which are much closer to our part of the city.

+1. We live near Eastern Market and thought SWS was too far to go, considering that Brent and Maury are closer by.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

Just because you and your friends need to take your kids to Mathnasium doesn't mean SWS isn't doing a good job at teaching math. It just means that your kid and your friends' kids need extra support.

I would have agreed with this statement pre Covid, in the lower grades. But by 4th or 5th grade, both of my children were behind in math after more than a year of virtual learning and so-so upper grades in-person math instruction. At Mathnasium, they've moved ahead of grade level efficiently. One of them just tested into 6th grade pre-algebra for the MS she will attend.

A kid who can handle 6th grade pre-algebra needs....extra support? How about the kid would have benefited from solid DCPS math instruction she didn't get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

Just because you and your friends need to take your kids to Mathnasium doesn't mean SWS isn't doing a good job at teaching math. It just means that your kid and your friends' kids need extra support.

I would have agreed with this statement pre Covid, in the lower grades. But by 4th or 5th grade, both of my children were behind in math after more than a year of virtual learning and so-so upper grades in-person math instruction. At Mathnasium, they've moved ahead of grade level efficiently. One of them just tested into 6th grade pre-algebra for the MS she will attend.

A kid who can handle 6th grade pre-algebra needs....extra support? How about the kid would have benefited from solid DCPS math instruction she didn't get.

But your story isn't particularly unique to SWS which, FWIW, has PARCC math scores on par with other Capitol Hill schools minus Brent (which I perceive as a higher SES pop) and above Ludlow Taylor and Watkins. I am also wondering if your determination of below grade level was made with beginning of year iready or they still tested below grade level at the spring iready or on PARCC.

[Anonymous]

PARCC math 4 or 5:
Brent: 67
SWS: 59.1
Maury: 59
Ludlow Taylor: 44
Watkins: 38.7
Capitol Hill Montessori: 17%

Manually pulled/added from individual sites so correct if I pulled wrong.

I know SWS fell behind on reading and I sensed a push to get kids back on track in my kid's class, at least, this year.

[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:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

As a teacher, it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work. It's analogous to me saying that the widget production at your work isn't that hot, despite actually meeting all industry standards

What a condescending bunch of BS. So does that mean you also don't get to judge the food at a restaurant because you're not a professional chef? Please don't belittle parents when it's plain to see that the academics are not that hot.

Yes, we all know when food tastes good and when it doesn't. This is not the same. You don't like the way your child is taught math; that's different than it being taught poorly or incorrectly.

Also, using a standard of "hot or not that hot" is more fitting for MySpace that educational evaluatoon

You keep lecturing parents how stupid we are and then wonder why teachers unions have lost so much public goodwill in recent years.

When my child comes home and says that 1+1=3, am I seriously supposed to pretend that I'm too ignorant to see the academic deficiencies staring right in my face?! Am I also supposed to pretend the low standardized test scores are all wrong and that only the teachers know best?

When your upper ES student comes back and tells you 1+1=3 report back

What do you mean when you say low overall test scores? Are you talking about the fact that not all students are testing on grade level? Because, as a teacher who inherited a class with students as low as K/1 in fifth grade this year, I know that's not a legitimate standard to measure my effectiveness.

I want to add, nobody is calling you or any parent stupid. You chose to call out teachers for bad instruction and are now upset that they are defending themselves.

Once again you're obfuscating the issue. The PP teacher literally said that "it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work." The PP parents basically expressed concern about their own kids' lack of academic progress while being told by teachers to shut up because only teachers know better.

Same poster: do you think it's wrong for teachers to believe that they know better? We're experts in the field. We went to college to do this work. I think it's a fair assumption that we would know better in regards to ES math instruction

np: Teachers here love to tell patents that they are not qualified to have opinions. However, the truth is that a lot of parents also have relevant expertise. Some parents are or were teachers; some have expertise in the field; some work for educational suppliers; some have extensive experience working with children; etc etc.

But also, the mentality on DCUM is a lot more type A than average.

Curious if the PP's determination of their kid being below grade level was based on fall iready scores? My kid is always "behind" grade level on fall iready and ahead by end of the year. I swear that test's fall percentiles are designed to make parents panic, then kids seem "improved" by the end of the year - oh look, iready worked to get your kid to grade level!

I - ready BOY scores are shared based on where students need to be at EOY. Being "behind" grade level is the age appropriate place

This is 100% untrue. It is specifically broken down by early/mid/late grade level for exactly this reason.

[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:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

As a teacher, it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work. It's analogous to me saying that the widget production at your work isn't that hot, despite actually meeting all industry standards

What a condescending bunch of BS. So does that mean you also don't get to judge the food at a restaurant because you're not a professional chef? Please don't belittle parents when it's plain to see that the academics are not that hot.

Yes, we all know when food tastes good and when it doesn't. This is not the same. You don't like the way your child is taught math; that's different than it being taught poorly or incorrectly.

Also, using a standard of "hot or not that hot" is more fitting for MySpace that educational evaluatoon

You keep lecturing parents how stupid we are and then wonder why teachers unions have lost so much public goodwill in recent years.

When my child comes home and says that 1+1=3, am I seriously supposed to pretend that I'm too ignorant to see the academic deficiencies staring right in my face?! Am I also supposed to pretend the low standardized test scores are all wrong and that only the teachers know best?

When your upper ES student comes back and tells you 1+1=3 report back

What do you mean when you say low overall test scores? Are you talking about the fact that not all students are testing on grade level? Because, as a teacher who inherited a class with students as low as K/1 in fifth grade this year, I know that's not a legitimate standard to measure my effectiveness.

I want to add, nobody is calling you or any parent stupid. You chose to call out teachers for bad instruction and are now upset that they are defending themselves.

Once again you're obfuscating the issue. The PP teacher literally said that "it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work." The PP parents basically expressed concern about their own kids' lack of academic progress while being told by teachers to shut up because only teachers know better.

Same poster: do you think it's wrong for teachers to believe that they know better? We're experts in the field. We went to college to do this work. I think it's a fair assumption that we would know better in regards to ES math instruction

np: Teachers here love to tell patents that they are not qualified to have opinions. However, the truth is that a lot of parents also have relevant expertise. Some parents are or were teachers; some have expertise in the field; some work for educational suppliers; some have extensive experience working with children; etc etc.

But also, the mentality on DCUM is a lot more type A than average.

Curious if the PP's determination of their kid being below grade level was based on fall iready scores? My kid is always "behind" grade level on fall iready and ahead by end of the year. I swear that test's fall percentiles are designed to make parents panic, then kids seem "improved" by the end of the year - oh look, iready worked to get your kid to grade level!

I - ready BOY scores are shared based on where students need to be at EOY. Being "behind" grade level is the age appropriate place

This is 100% untrue. It is specifically broken down by early/mid/late grade level for exactly this reason.

I both know this and don't believe it based on personal experience of kid always "behind" and low percentile at start of year then on/ahead and high percentile at end of year after learning the grade level material. There is something about the way it's done that is self-serving to make i-ready look good, like, hey, it worked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PARCC math 4 or 5:
Brent: 67
SWS: 59.1
Maury: 59
Ludlow Taylor: 44
Watkins: 38.7
Capitol Hill Montessori: 17%

Manually pulled/added from individual sites so correct if I pulled wrong.

I know SWS fell behind on reading and I sensed a push to get kids back on track in my kid's class, at least, this year.

Math tracks demographics almost exactly at these schools. White percentages are within 2-3 points at every one of these schools, which is a rounding error with sub 100 kids per grade. AA is horrific at all. This is a citywide phenomenon.

L-T had amazing ELA scores coming out ahead overall despite being 60% AA in testing grades (compared to like 20 at some schools). It’s largely due to AA kids doing much better in ELA there, but white scores were also a bit higher than most places (Maury was similar; SWS was worse than others).

[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:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

As a teacher, it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work. It's analogous to me saying that the widget production at your work isn't that hot, despite actually meeting all industry standards

What a condescending bunch of BS. So does that mean you also don't get to judge the food at a restaurant because you're not a professional chef? Please don't belittle parents when it's plain to see that the academics are not that hot.

Yes, we all know when food tastes good and when it doesn't. This is not the same. You don't like the way your child is taught math; that's different than it being taught poorly or incorrectly.

Also, using a standard of "hot or not that hot" is more fitting for MySpace that educational evaluatoon

You keep lecturing parents how stupid we are and then wonder why teachers unions have lost so much public goodwill in recent years.

When my child comes home and says that 1+1=3, am I seriously supposed to pretend that I'm too ignorant to see the academic deficiencies staring right in my face?! Am I also supposed to pretend the low standardized test scores are all wrong and that only the teachers know best?

When your upper ES student comes back and tells you 1+1=3 report back

What do you mean when you say low overall test scores? Are you talking about the fact that not all students are testing on grade level? Because, as a teacher who inherited a class with students as low as K/1 in fifth grade this year, I know that's not a legitimate standard to measure my effectiveness.

I want to add, nobody is calling you or any parent stupid. You chose to call out teachers for bad instruction and are now upset that they are defending themselves.

Once again you're obfuscating the issue. The PP teacher literally said that "it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work." The PP parents basically expressed concern about their own kids' lack of academic progress while being told by teachers to shut up because only teachers know better.

Same poster: do you think it's wrong for teachers to believe that they know better? We're experts in the field. We went to college to do this work. I think it's a fair assumption that we would know better in regards to ES math instruction

np: Teachers here love to tell patents that they are not qualified to have opinions. However, the truth is that a lot of parents also have relevant expertise. Some parents are or were teachers; some have expertise in the field; some work for educational suppliers; some have extensive experience working with children; etc etc.

But also, the mentality on DCUM is a lot more type A than average.

Curious if the PP's determination of their kid being below grade level was based on fall iready scores? My kid is always "behind" grade level on fall iready and ahead by end of the year. I swear that test's fall percentiles are designed to make parents panic, then kids seem "improved" by the end of the year - oh look, iready worked to get your kid to grade level!

I - ready BOY scores are shared based on where students need to be at EOY. Being "behind" grade level is the age appropriate place

This is 100% untrue. It is specifically broken down by early/mid/late grade level for exactly this reason.

https://freeman.wjusd.org/documents/Learning%20Resources/I-Ready/i-R-Understanding-Report-Views.pdf

From this explainer, re: beginning of year view.

"Student is on level if: Student is performing less than 1 level below through end of current grade level.*"

The "early" designation is considered on level starting at MOY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PARCC math 4 or 5:
Brent: 67
SWS: 59.1
Maury: 59
Ludlow Taylor: 44
Watkins: 38.7
Capitol Hill Montessori: 17%

Manually pulled/added from individual sites so correct if I pulled wrong.

I know SWS fell behind on reading and I sensed a push to get kids back on track in my kid's class, at least, this year.

Math tracks demographics almost exactly at these schools. White percentages are within 2-3 points at every one of these schools, which is a rounding error with sub 100 kids per grade. AA is horrific at all. This is a citywide phenomenon.

L-T had amazing ELA scores coming out ahead overall despite being 60% AA in testing grades (compared to like 20 at some schools). It’s largely due to AA kids doing much better in ELA there, but white scores were also a bit higher than most places (Maury was similar; SWS was worse than others).

I agree, L-T had amazing scores all things considered.

I know the perception of SWS as populated with yoga pant wearing rich types (and sure, there is some of that), but I honestly think SWS is more of a mixed bag in SES, generally speaking as it also includes a solid (and growing) chunk of more lower middle class parents in general, regardless of ethnicity. People who couldn't afford to live closer, aren't the lawyer/high earning Fed types who afford $1M+ for homes near SWS, but want something better than their in bounds school where they are.

[Anonymous]

FWIW I don’t think SWS is uniquely bad at teaching math and no data seems to support that. I don’t love DCPS’ math curriculum though and think it doesn’t line up with iReady well, so it’s hard to know what to think of the assessments. Our kid goes to Mathnasium.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FWIW I don’t think SWS is uniquely bad at teaching math and no data seems to support that. I don’t love DCPS’ math curriculum though and think it doesn’t line up with iReady well[b], so it’s hard to know what to think of the assessments. Our kid goes to Mathnasium.

Teacher here and completely agree with this part, even though I think eureka. There's not enough time in the pacing to cover all the geometry and measurement domains, which lead to skewed i ready results

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

As a teacher, it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work. It's analogous to me saying that the widget production at your work isn't that hot, despite actually meeting all industry standards

What a condescending bunch of BS. So does that mean you also don't get to judge the food at a restaurant because you're not a professional chef? Please don't belittle parents when it's plain to see that the academics are not that hot.

Yes, we all know when food tastes good and when it doesn't. This is not the same. You don't like the way your child is taught math; that's different than it being taught poorly or incorrectly.

Also, using a standard of "hot or not that hot" is more fitting for MySpace that educational evaluatoon

You keep lecturing parents how stupid we are and then wonder why teachers unions have lost so much public goodwill in recent years.

When my child comes home and says that 1+1=3, am I seriously supposed to pretend that I'm too ignorant to see the academic deficiencies staring right in my face?! Am I also supposed to pretend the low standardized test scores are all wrong and that only the teachers know best?

When your upper ES student comes back and tells you 1+1=3 report back

What do you mean when you say low overall test scores? Are you talking about the fact that not all students are testing on grade level? Because, as a teacher who inherited a class with students as low as K/1 in fifth grade this year, I know that's not a legitimate standard to measure my effectiveness.

I want to add, nobody is calling you or any parent stupid. You chose to call out teachers for bad instruction and are now upset that they are defending themselves.

Once again you're obfuscating the issue. The PP teacher literally said that "it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work." The PP parents basically expressed concern about their own kids' lack of academic progress while being told by teachers to shut up because only teachers know better.

Same poster: do you think it's wrong for teachers to believe that they know better? We're experts in the field. We went to college to do this work. I think it's a fair assumption that we would know better in regards to ES math instruction

np: Teachers here love to tell patents that they are not qualified to have opinions. However, the truth is that a lot of parents also have relevant expertise. Some parents are or were teachers; some have expertise in the field; some work for educational suppliers; some have extensive experience working with children; etc etc.

But also, the mentality on DCUM is a lot more type A than average.

Curious if the PP's determination of their kid being below grade level was based on fall iready scores? My kid is always "behind" grade level on fall iready and ahead by end of the year. I swear that test's fall percentiles are designed to make parents panic, then kids seem "improved" by the end of the year - oh look, iready worked to get your kid to grade level!

I - ready BOY scores are shared based on where students need to be at EOY. Being "behind" grade level is the age appropriate place

This is 100% untrue. It is specifically broken down by early/mid/late grade level for exactly this reason.

https://freeman.wjusd.org/documents/Learning%20Resources/I-Ready/i-R-Understanding-Report-Views.pdf

From this explainer, re: beginning of year view.

"Student is on level if: Student is performing less than 1 level below through end of current grade level.*"

The "early" designation is considered on level starting at MOY

Sort of. It’s done by individual number though, not overall category. So a kid only needs one point above the bottom score in the relevant category.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

As a teacher, it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work. It's analogous to me saying that the widget production at your work isn't that hot, despite actually meeting all industry standards

What a condescending bunch of BS. So does that mean you also don't get to judge the food at a restaurant because you're not a professional chef? Please don't belittle parents when it's plain to see that the academics are not that hot.

Yes, we all know when food tastes good and when it doesn't. This is not the same. You don't like the way your child is taught math; that's different than it being taught poorly or incorrectly.

Also, using a standard of "hot or not that hot" is more fitting for MySpace that educational evaluatoon

You keep lecturing parents how stupid we are and then wonder why teachers unions have lost so much public goodwill in recent years.

When my child comes home and says that 1+1=3, am I seriously supposed to pretend that I'm too ignorant to see the academic deficiencies staring right in my face?! Am I also supposed to pretend the low standardized test scores are all wrong and that only the teachers know best?

When your upper ES student comes back and tells you 1+1=3 report back

What do you mean when you say low overall test scores? Are you talking about the fact that not all students are testing on grade level? Because, as a teacher who inherited a class with students as low as K/1 in fifth grade this year, I know that's not a legitimate standard to measure my effectiveness.

I want to add, nobody is calling you or any parent stupid. You chose to call out teachers for bad instruction and are now upset that they are defending themselves.

Once again you're obfuscating the issue. The PP teacher literally said that "it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work." The PP parents basically expressed concern about their own kids' lack of academic progress while being told by teachers to shut up because only teachers know better.

Same poster: do you think it's wrong for teachers to believe that they know better? We're experts in the field. We went to college to do this work. I think it's a fair assumption that we would know better in regards to ES math instruction

np: Teachers here love to tell patents that they are not qualified to have opinions. However, the truth is that a lot of parents also have relevant expertise. Some parents are or were teachers; some have expertise in the field; some work for educational suppliers; some have extensive experience working with children; etc etc.

But also, the mentality on DCUM is a lot more type A than average.

Curious if the PP's determination of their kid being below grade level was based on fall iready scores? My kid is always "behind" grade level on fall iready and ahead by end of the year. I swear that test's fall percentiles are designed to make parents panic, then kids seem "improved" by the end of the year - oh look, iready worked to get your kid to grade level!

I - ready BOY scores are shared based on where students need to be at EOY. Being "behind" grade level is the age appropriate place

This is 100% untrue. It is specifically broken down by early/mid/late grade level for exactly this reason.

I both know this and don't believe it based on personal experience of kid always "behind" and low percentile at start of year then on/ahead and high percentile at end of year after learning the grade level material. There is something about the way it's done that is self-serving to make i-ready look good, like, hey, it worked.

It can work the other way too though. Our kid was “ahead of grade level” for BOY 2nd grade testing as mid-2nd grade in the 94th percentile. Went up to 96th percentile at MOY but was now on grade level because the mid year range is so broad (she’d also qualify as early the next year, for instance, but it doesn’t work like that for placement).