Wow what a gross thread. So many negative comments. You all don’t think this isn’t valuable information for families to choose their child’s school? Of course it is! Also, I would be incredibly concerned if my child’s school that has a high at-risk student percentage did not make this list. The cut off to be considered is 30% at-risk and some of these schools have 70%+ at risk and ranked higher than others with much lower at-risk populations. This is definitely a valuable tool for parents!

Anonymous wrote:This thread is gross. You have a list of schools that are making demonstrated progress in closing the achievement gap, and people are comparing that to school performance in neighborhoods where the biggest at-risk problem is that Larla's Tesla might not come in time for her 16th birthday.

Well said…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on how you define doing well. Soft bigotry of low expectations seems apt

Wasn’t that phrase a George Bush justification for cutting funds to public schools. Very cringy.

Cringy and not even accurate. How is recognizing students/schools who performed better than their peers and above the city average during a pandemic low expectations?

Because you're taking low preforming schools, comparing them to each other and then celebrating the slightly less bad. Those same results in the suburbs would have people calling for principals' jobs.

Which suburban schools with high numbers of at-risk students are doing significantly better than these schools?

Read the article. They are celebrating these schools where less than 1/4th of the kids are on grade level.

Classic DCPS and DC move. We are doing so great!

Ok these schools did better than other similar high risk schools. Great for them but their performance overall is still very low.

I agree with the poster that you are talking low performance schools and comparing to each other and celebrating the less bad. DC is the city of low expectations and it’s true the city average is shockingly low. Lower now that DC had a higher learning loss during the pandemic than the national average.

This thread is gross. You have a list of schools that are making demonstrated progress in closing the achievement gap, and people are comparing that to school performance in neighborhoods where the biggest at-risk problem is that Larla's Tesla might not come in time for her 16th birthday.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on how you define doing well. Soft bigotry of low expectations seems apt

Wasn’t that phrase a George Bush justification for cutting funds to public schools. Very cringy.

Cringy and not even accurate. How is recognizing students/schools who performed better than their peers and above the city average during a pandemic low expectations?

Because you're taking low preforming schools, comparing them to each other and then celebrating the slightly less bad. Those same results in the suburbs would have people calling for principals' jobs.

Wow- there is an entire suburb bordering dc with far lower performing schools than any of the schools listed. I’m sure you meant MoCO or Arlington, though, since that’s the DCUM way of thinking. DC doesn’t even take the same assessment as those states. I was involved in the assessment process when this all rolled out, DC’s now is harder, I do know what I’m talking about. These schools can definitely do better, but let’s not start throwing around comments about suburbs and principals getting fired- clearly you have a very basic understanding of this issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on how you define doing well. Soft bigotry of low expectations seems apt

Wasn’t that phrase a George Bush justification for cutting funds to public schools. Very cringy.

Cringy and not even accurate. How is recognizing students/schools who performed better than their peers and above the city average during a pandemic low expectations?

Because you're taking low preforming schools, comparing them to each other and then celebrating the slightly less bad. Those same results in the suburbs would have people calling for principals' jobs.

Shame on those schools for being recognized for something so pointless right?!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on how you define doing well. Soft bigotry of low expectations seems apt

Wasn’t that phrase a George Bush justification for cutting funds to public schools. Very cringy.

Cringy and not even accurate. How is recognizing students/schools who performed better than their peers and above the city average during a pandemic low expectations?

Because you're taking low preforming schools, comparing them to each other and then celebrating the slightly less bad. Those same results in the suburbs would have people calling for principals' jobs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on how you define doing well. Soft bigotry of low expectations seems apt

Wasn’t that phrase a George Bush justification for cutting funds to public schools. Very cringy.

Cringy and not even accurate. How is recognizing students/schools who performed better than their peers and above the city average during a pandemic low expectations?

Because the city average is very, very low.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on how you define doing well. Soft bigotry of low expectations seems apt

Wasn’t that phrase a George Bush justification for cutting funds to public schools. Very cringy.

Cringy and not even accurate. How is recognizing students/schools who performed better than their peers and above the city average during a pandemic low expectations?

In this case, doing well means doing much better than others serving a similar population. These schools should be recognized for their work but that doesn't mean there isn't a lot more for them (and others) to do.

Anonymous wrote:It depends on how you define doing well. Soft bigotry of low expectations seems apt

Wasn’t that phrase a George Bush justification for cutting funds to public schools. Very cringy.

It depends on how you define doing well. Soft bigotry of low expectations seems apt

Looks like quite a few charter and public schools serving more at-risk communities are doing really well: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/10/29/dc-bold-performance-schools-at-risk-students-empower-k12/