Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am shocked at how low the AA numbers are for Brent. I don't think this is good for the school overall.

Shocked, shocked!

Brent is a neighborhood school in a catchment area where real estate values have gone through the roof in the last decade, drawing in droves of affluent families.

Don't like a neighborhood school system? No shock for you in Boston or San Fran, where by-right neighborhood schools didn't survive the 70s.

“Drawing in droves of affluent families”

Please see gentrification.

Anonymous wrote:It's still 4 stars. But they have a huge racial achievement gap and their students with disabilities and at-risk students do poorly on PARCC and other schools have higher proficiency for their white students and the median growth percentile is slightly above average.

So it's a school with a population that starts out with above-average advantages, and doesn't add too much value. Thus a rating that is--like the MGP--slightly above average but not outstanding.

This is an interesting question. I didn't find the STAR rating too revealing except to the extent that it made more apparent some phenomena that you might otherwise only notice by really digging into PARCC scores. I think the PP quoted above captured some of those phenomena (white and black students at some other schools have higher proficiency rates than they do at Brent). I do wonder about this because Brent has a very high percentage of amazing teachers and virtually none who aren't really good. And it's got good curriculums, parent support, school spirit, etc. Scattered behavioral issues, but I can't imagine other schools are any better...

Some factors that might affect scores are: 1) a dearth of test preparation (which is fine by me) and 2) an outflow of academically strong 5th graders. I've always wondered what else to ascribe slightly lower test scores to.

New principal is absolutely fantastic for examining everything and pushing for constant improvement - for kids below, at, and above grade level. So I look forward to seeing how things change in the coming years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am shocked at how low the AA numbers are for Brent. I don't think this is good for the school overall.

Shocked, shocked!

Brent is a neighborhood school in a catchment area where real estate values have gone through the roof in the last decade, drawing in droves of affluent families.

Don't like a neighborhood school system? No shock for you in Boston or San Fran, where by-right neighborhood schools didn't survive the 70s.

I think the PP meant how low AA students perform compared to other cohorts, not the enrollment figures.

Anonymous wrote:I am shocked at how low the AA numbers are for Brent. I don't think this is good for the school overall.

Shocked, shocked!

Brent is a neighborhood school in a catchment area where real estate values have gone through the roof in the last decade, drawing in droves of affluent families.

Don't like a neighborhood school system? No shock for you in Boston or San Fran, where by-right neighborhood schools didn't survive the 70s.

I am shocked at how low the AA numbers are for Brent. I don't think this is good for the school overall.

I could care less how Brent ranks on the Hill, in the city. My kids have been very happy there, learning a lot into the upper grades. My home value has doubled in 7 or 8 years. Our commute to the school is several minutes on foot. The kids see their friends outside of school without trying, at Sports on the Hill, church, scouts etc.

Anonymous wrote:Do they still have a bullying problem? That could be part of it.

Oh come on. What idiotic things people post. We've been at Brent for 7 years for several children (two shy, one with an obvious disability) and seen almost no bullying along the way. The new playground monitors/outdoor activity leaders this year have been terrific. Brent playground mania is a thing of the past, despite the squeeze on space due to the 2 trailers.

What happened: Brent was confirmed despite the vile, lying slurs cast on his good name.

Yeah the Title 1 info is incorrect on at least a couple schools.

Anonymous wrote:Why is it listed as a Title I school with free aftercare, on the report card? Makes me wonder if the other info is as reliable.

Because DCPS didn't submit the right data to OSSE for a host of schools.

The test data is consistent with what OSSE released in early fall.

Anonymous wrote:Do they still have a bullying problem? That could be part of it.

0 incidents show up on the report card, and I don't think bullying is one of the scored items (it's there for informational purposes only).

These are the items that go into the STAR rating. https://dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0212/star-overall?lang=en

Why is it listed as a Title I school with free aftercare, on the report card? Makes me wonder if the other info is as reliable.

Do they still have a bullying problem? That could be part of it.

It's still 4 stars. But they have a huge racial achievement gap and their students with disabilities and at-risk students do poorly on PARCC and other schools have higher proficiency for their white students and the median growth percentile is slightly above average.

So it's a school with a population that starts out with above-average advantages, and doesn't add too much value. Thus a rating that is--like the MGP--slightly above average but not outstanding.

They have one of the lowest ranks on the Hill.

Maury: 94%
SWS: 88%
Ludlow: 77%
Watkins: 73%
Brent: 65%

What happened?