Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
DC Public and Public Charter Schools
Reply to "By the numbers: A dispassioned evaluation of Hardy (compared to Deal and Wilson)"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous] I agree that the numbers of IB families who are seriously considering Hardy is on an upward trajectory, but it's not there quite yet. I'm praying for a "flip" this year because my child will enter Hardy in 2017-18. [/quote] OP here. I don't think the flip will be reflected until the current 4th graders enroll in Hardy in 6th. This year's numbers likely look similar to last year -- probably an additional 10 IB kids and another additional 20 feeder but not IB kids. (If DCCAS is still administered -- is it? -- the numbers should show some improvement due to (my guess of) 30 more well-prepared students.) Given the class sizes, current 5th graders are unlikely to cause a large bulge in either IB or feeder numbers. But the year after that -- with Hyde, Mann, Stoddert (and Eaton) adding additional 5th grade classes for the coming year -- I would expect to see a significant change in IB numbers. That said, I completely believe that Hardy is already a good school for IB children. But for those who are waiting until the IB percentage increases before believing the data, the current 4th graders are going to be the first year in which the difference is unmistakeable. That is, by school year 2016-2017, the then 6th grade class should look little like current classes. [/quote] The change in testing this year could help or throw a wrench into things. OP, DCCAS have been abandoned and this year DCPS adopted a new test--PARCC. It is my understanding that whenever a new standardized test is introduced we are supposed to expect lower scores. And PARCC ratchets up the tension a bit because all the testing is online, not paper and pencil, so we could expect even lower scores because of the change in how the test is administered and how prepared the students were for the logistics of the test, forget the content. Schools' budgets and teachers will not be held accountable for this year's testing results, however, if the drop in scores or significant or not uniform across the city, lots of people could read into that. So, for instance if Hardy's scores drop a lot more than Deal's drop, what will people take from that? [/quote] From what I have heard about PARCC, it is expected to differentiate more (read: more thoroughly expose weaknesses). This may hurt up and coming schools by widening performance gaps. For example, OP is basing arguments on percent proficient or advanced on DCCAS. A lot of parents look at this proficient or advanced number. Advanced is hard to achieve, but proficient not so hard, and can be coached. As I understand it, under PARCC and common core, it is more difficult to coach weaker students to the test, and therefore students whose comprehension is shallow or borderline will do poorly always, whereas under CAS they could maybe be coached over the finish line. Whereas students with advanced/deep comprehension will do just fine, as they did on CAS. So the difference between say Janney and an up and coming ES will be even larger. That's why some low income education advocates are against common core, because it requires deep understanding, so it makes it very hard to intervene with a student later in life who did not have advantages at younger ages when the foundations of literacy and numeracy are laid. Any education experts have a view on this? [/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