Reply to Why are HRCS so popular? Test scores stink.

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Why are HRCS so popular? Test scores stink."

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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Why would anyone pick Bruce Monroe over Creative Minds and their shady campus up at the Armed Forces Retirement Home? Do you not have a car?[/quote]

I'm a CMI parent (and have been for several years).  I hope PP, you are not one.  While CMI is a great school - putting schools against each other like this does not benefit the children of DC (and is not part of the mindset of CMI).

I know many Bruce Monroe families (and both charter and DCPS families) both schools have great things to offer and I hope each continues to grow![/quote]

I know that test scores aren't the be-all-end-all and maybe test scores do not matter much to you either. That said, I believe they matter to the extent that they can be early indicators of lack of leadership on the part of the administration (when test scores continue to slip).  Have there been any conversations within the CMI community over the PARCC testing and scores?  How do you feel about the test scores?[/quote]

We have a meeting coming up to discuss it.  I'm not happy about the scores, I will be honest.  As a parent of an older child, I was hoping for better - as for lack of leadership, I've been at CMI since the begining and I would disagree with that statement, but I'm looking forward to the discussion around the scores and what they mean.  I am commited to the school, my child is doing well there, but that is wonder of the school choice - not every program works for every child.[/quote]

CMI seems like a great little school in many respects (I know a couple of families there), but I wonder if they should streamline their approach?  They have a special ed focus, which is great, but also a global perspective which includes taking classes in two languages, and then an arts focus too.  I wonder if it is difficult to adequately address the basics, especially for some kids with challenges, given so many different focii?  Or, if administration plans on retaining all of them, perhaps they could do something like lengthen the school day a little, or make language tracks (either Spanish OR Mandarin for each child, but not both) to free up some time to spend on the basics.  Just a few thoughts.  [/quote]

Agree with this. The two languages thing seems pointless. [/quote]

Well, lucky for us you are not making decisions about our childs education.[/quote]

Unluckily for your child though. [/quote]

Do you have research to back your statement?  Or just not-so-witty one liners?[/quote]

I don't care what you do with your kid because it's obvious you're a good parent who cares and is doing what's best. But confusing kids with "exposure" to two languages is utter nonsense and I think that time could be best directed towards improving fundamental skills, which would help bring CMI's test scores. And yes you might not want immersion, and that's fine (really!). I think exposure to language is good, but as someone who speaks multiple languages and understands how children learn languages, it's clear to me that being "exposed" to two languages, not learning either in any depth is just a time-waster that looks good on a brochure. [/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