Reply to New Jackson-Reed HS (Wilson HS) School Principal

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "New Jackson-Reed HS (Wilson HS) School Principal - Sah Brown from Eastern High School"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Having lived in both places, yes, the families of school aged kids in ward 3 tend to be much wealthier than on the hill.  [b]That said, a much higher percentage of the kids also attend privates.  And wilson has its fair share of kids who live out of bounds, although probably not as many as eastern, as a percentage of the population.  [/b]

I agree that if the Higher SES hill population on the hill sent their kids to eastern at the same rate that the higher SES population in ward 3 send their kids to wilson, the demographics could be much more similar.  I understand the hesitance of hill parents who aren’t receiving assurance that eastern would offer the same advanced coursework as wilson, even if kids capable of that work enroll at the school.  I also understand the worry of ward 3 parents who hear that he did not try to attract hill parents to eastern, and think that he might also not seek to maintain the higher SES IB population at wilson.   That said, ward 3 has status quo on its side.  [/quote]

I assume that the bolded is an effort to argue that the enrolled populations are not materially dissimilar when one considers OOB kid enrolled at Wilson and those who self-select out of Ward 3 to private schools. The data does not align with your hypothesis. 72+% of Eastern kids are "at-risk". That's 22% for Wilson.

But the larger point that you and others seem to be arguing is that the IB demographics of Eastern and Ward 3 are similar (if not identical). No matter how many times you repeat the claim and try to condescendingly dismiss away facts because, for instance, "you have lived in both places" the data is what it is. You all remind me of Trump supporters who say that they "know" the election was stolen and no data or facts anyone shows you will change your minds. But let's try an exercise in actual data, not your perceptions, shall we?

I am starting on the premise that what many of you are calling "the Hill" is the extended hill for purposes of this exercise. The Eastern HS IB population on CH can be approximated to zip codes 20002 and 20003. I am ignoring 20024 because it is very small and has even lower median income, etc. than 20002 and 20003. Trust me when I tell you including that does not help make your case. This is the actual data.

Population
Ward 3: 81,883
20002: 70,788
20003: 35,731

Median Income
Ward 3: $155,813
20002: $112,496 
20003: $154,466

Families Below Poverty With Children
Ward 3: 0.7%
20002: 4.76%
20003: 4.27%

% with Bachelors Degree or Higher
Ward 3: 87%
20002: 64%
20003: 83%

Take a look at the % of families with kids below the poverty line. Those are the IB people sending kids to school. Even if we cherry pick just 20003, the data doesn't match Ward 3 and that's ignoring the fact that 20003 is much smaller than Ward 3 and that 20002 (IB for Eastern) is much larger and has even less favorable comparables to Ward 3.

I am not arguing that 20003 and 20002 UMC families don't have a right to send their kids to a school providing an excellent education. I am not arguing that sending your kids elsewhere is racist or that anyone should be condemned for doing so. My response here is a direct retort to those of you on this thread that think that just because everyone you know is UMC that must necessarily mean that the Hill's demographics are the same as your friends in Ward 3. They. Are. Not.

Good day, all. [/quote]

You can’t compare 20002 and 20003 as an amorphous block when comparing Eastern to Wilson. Much of 20002 and 20003 are served by different much larger high schools. The Eastern catchment is small and much higher income. [/quote]

It also includes 20024. You want to include 20024 too? OK.

Your belief that demographics of catchments for Eastern and Wilson are the same is not supported by data. I said it before I will say it again; you and your friends are in many ways no different than the Trump people who "know" the election was stolen and they are unwilling to listen to logic, reason or data that clearly disproves their belief.

Population
Ward 3: 81,883
20002: 70,788
20003: 35,731
[b]20024: 13,138
[/b]
Median Income
Ward 3: $155,813
20002: $112,496 
20003: $154,466 
[b]20024: $103,925
[/b]
Families Below Poverty With Children
Ward 3: 0.7%
20002: 4.76%
20003: 4.27%
[b]20024: 4.88%
[/b]
% with Bachelors Degree or Higher
Ward 3: 87%
20002: 64%
20003: 83%
[b]20024: 82%
[/b][/quote]

First, I think your stats actually show that the W3 and 20003 demographics are *incredibly* similar except that there are 4% additional families below the poverty line in 20003. Given that the median incomes are functionally identical, we don't really know what this means (are there 4% of W3ers who are like $5 above the poverty line or is the entire curve shaped differently or is just the very end of the curve differently shaped?)... but a school that is 5% below the poverty line is not going to have huge issues, so if the two schools were limited to THOSE populations, they would look the same with one extra guidance counselor at the 20002 school.

Second, 20002 extends way up into Trinidad and into lots of area that isn't zoned for Eastern (e.g., Wheatley education campus) and that whole chunk is much poorer. If you actually just took the part of 20002 that's IB for Eastern, it really would look different because of how poverty is concentrated. Not quite like 20003 and W3... though I actually think the % below the poverty line would be lower in the 20002 Eastern IB than in 20003 because of Potomac Gardens; the Eastern IB part of 20002 doesn't have that kind of concentrated poverty and the difference is only .5 to begin with.

[b]But most importantly, the MEDIAN in all of these areas is over $100K! That means these IBs should be EASILY majority MC & UMC which is really what posters meant to begin with... [/b][/quote]

Another DCUM reply illustrating no understanding of DC or the meaning of data. I am guessing it would surprise you to learn that the median income for all of DC is over $100,000? By your logic that means all of DC is UMC, right? [/quote]

Google tells me DC’s median household income is $92,000 (ie, <$100,000).

We’re long PPP’s statistics by Ward per individual or per household?[/quote]

Per household [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics