Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I-Ready probably asks some questions on subject matter that has not been taught yet at the beginning of the year so lots of kids miss those questions early on and answer them correctly later. But that is not really self-serving. It is certainly possible to test above grade level at the start of the year on I-Ready and then just stagnate.

That’s what happened with both my kids. Worked with them over the summer. They were above grade level coming in this year. Then slowly slid backwards. Thanks SWS!

SWS has among the best math PARCC scores on the Hill excluding Brent which is a higher SES population. Don't think you're getting much better anywhere else in DCPS. Everything taught was appropriate grade level and they got a math worksheet for homework every week which had the same kinds of grade appropriate questions as Khan academy, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I-Ready probably asks some questions on subject matter that has not been taught yet at the beginning of the year so lots of kids miss those questions early on and answer them correctly later. But that is not really self-serving. It is certainly possible to test above grade level at the start of the year on I-Ready and then just stagnate.

That’s what happened with both my kids. Worked with them over the summer. They were above grade level coming in this year. Then slowly slid backwards. Thanks SWS!

Anonymous wrote:No. I-Ready probably asks some questions on subject matter that has not been taught yet at the beginning of the year so lots of kids miss those questions early on and answer them correctly later. But that is not really self-serving. It is certainly possible to test above grade level at the start of the year on I-Ready and then just stagnate.

Anonymous wrote:So I can maybe guess at the answer to this question but I am hoping someone else can explain it to me.

SWS is a citywide school with no in-boundary preference. It's a popular school and always has a long waitlist and admits few kids off the waitlist (last year it made one waitlist offer). So admission to SWS should be pretty egalitarian -- you do the lottery, and if you get lucky, you get a spot.

So why is SWS 60% white? It's one of the whitest schools in the city. Brent Elementary is about as white, but Brent is a boundary school in a very white neighborhood, so that is more easily explained.

But shouldn't SWS be more reflective of city demographics? What's going on?

My guess is that it's partly due to how sibling preference operates in a school with very small class sizes. If even a third of SWS's PK class is getting sibling preference, that will heavily reinforce demographics from prior years. I also wonder if the low percentages of non-white kids is self-perpetuating, because it might make the school less appealing to parents of black and Latino kids, especially when there are so many schools in DC with much larger POC populations, many of them excellent schools.

But still: how did this happen in the first place? I just don't understand how a citywide school in DC gets to 60% white kids in the first place. I know Capitol Hill is increasingly very white, but SWS is currently in a flex space in Hill East which is much less white. And most other Capital Hill schools, except Brent, still have less than 50% white student populations. And other citywide schools and charters in the area (CHML, TR, Apple Tree) all have populations that are much more reflective of the city's overall population.

What's going on?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

My kid is always ahead of grade level at BOY, and then behind grade level at EOY. But come next year, he's once again ahead of grade level at BOY. How can this be possible??

At this point I disregard I-ready testing and just talk with the teacher and review my kid's work myself.

As a teacher, it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work. It's analogous to me saying that the widget production at your work isn't that hot, despite actually meeting all industry standards

What a condescending bunch of BS. So does that mean you also don't get to judge the food at a restaurant because you're not a professional chef? Please don't belittle parents when it's plain to see that the academics are not that hot.

Yes, we all know when food tastes good and when it doesn't. This is not the same. You don't like the way your child is taught math; that's different than it being taught poorly or incorrectly.

Also, using a standard of "hot or not that hot" is more fitting for MySpace that educational evaluatoon

You keep lecturing parents how stupid we are and then wonder why teachers unions have lost so much public goodwill in recent years.

When my child comes home and says that 1+1=3, am I seriously supposed to pretend that I'm too ignorant to see the academic deficiencies staring right in my face?! Am I also supposed to pretend the low standardized test scores are all wrong and that only the teachers know best?

When your upper ES student comes back and tells you 1+1=3 report back

What do you mean when you say low overall test scores? Are you talking about the fact that not all students are testing on grade level? Because, as a teacher who inherited a class with students as low as K/1 in fifth grade this year, I know that's not a legitimate standard to measure my effectiveness.

I want to add, nobody is calling you or any parent stupid. You chose to call out teachers for bad instruction and are now upset that they are defending themselves.

Once again you're obfuscating the issue. The PP teacher literally said that "it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work." The PP parents basically expressed concern about their own kids' lack of academic progress while being told by teachers to shut up because only teachers know better.

Same poster: do you think it's wrong for teachers to believe that they know better? We're experts in the field. We went to college to do this work. I think it's a fair assumption that we would know better in regards to ES math instruction

np: Teachers here love to tell patents that they are not qualified to have opinions. However, the truth is that a lot of parents also have relevant expertise. Some parents are or were teachers; some have expertise in the field; some work for educational suppliers; some have extensive experience working with children; etc etc.

But also, the mentality on DCUM is a lot more type A than average.

Curious if the PP's determination of their kid being below grade level was based on fall iready scores? My kid is always "behind" grade level on fall iready and ahead by end of the year. I swear that test's fall percentiles are designed to make parents panic, then kids seem "improved" by the end of the year - oh look, iready worked to get your kid to grade level!

I - ready BOY scores are shared based on where students need to be at EOY. Being "behind" grade level is the age appropriate place

This is 100% untrue. It is specifically broken down by early/mid/late grade level for exactly this reason.

I both know this and don't believe it based on personal experience of kid always "behind" and low percentile at start of year then on/ahead and high percentile at end of year after learning the grade level material. There is something about the way it's done that is self-serving to make i-ready look good, like, hey, it worked.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, my kid and his classmates from SWS did not struggle when they transitioned to BASIS.

Decent stock is ok anywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I can maybe guess at the answer to this question but I am hoping someone else can explain it to me.

SWS is a citywide school with no in-boundary preference. It's a popular school and always has a long waitlist and admits few kids off the waitlist (last year it made one waitlist offer). So admission to SWS should be pretty egalitarian -- you do the lottery, and if you get lucky, you get a spot.

So why is SWS 60% white? It's one of the whitest schools in the city. Brent Elementary is about as white, but Brent is a boundary school in a very white neighborhood, so that is more easily explained.

But shouldn't SWS be more reflective of city demographics? What's going on?

My guess is that it's partly due to how sibling preference operates in a school with very small class sizes. If even a third of SWS's PK class is getting sibling preference, that will heavily reinforce demographics from prior years. I also wonder if the low percentages of non-white kids is self-perpetuating, because it might make the school less appealing to parents of black and Latino kids, especially when there are so many schools in DC with much larger POC populations, many of them excellent schools.

But still: how did this happen in the first place? I just don't understand how a citywide school in DC gets to 60% white kids in the first place. I know Capitol Hill is increasingly very white, but SWS is currently in a flex space in Hill East which is much less white. And most other Capital Hill schools, except Brent, still have less than 50% white student populations. And other citywide schools and charters in the area (CHML, TR, Apple Tree) all have populations that are much more reflective of the city's overall population.

What's going on?

My childhood elementary school was 90% white.

And?

60% white is a low pct

60% of anything is not really diverse. 60% is a clear majority that can flex its power.

Does SWS already have an at-risk preference in the lottery?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I can maybe guess at the answer to this question but I am hoping someone else can explain it to me.

SWS is a citywide school with no in-boundary preference. It's a popular school and always has a long waitlist and admits few kids off the waitlist (last year it made one waitlist offer). So admission to SWS should be pretty egalitarian -- you do the lottery, and if you get lucky, you get a spot.

So why is SWS 60% white? It's one of the whitest schools in the city. Brent Elementary is about as white, but Brent is a boundary school in a very white neighborhood, so that is more easily explained.

But shouldn't SWS be more reflective of city demographics? What's going on?

My guess is that it's partly due to how sibling preference operates in a school with very small class sizes. If even a third of SWS's PK class is getting sibling preference, that will heavily reinforce demographics from prior years. I also wonder if the low percentages of non-white kids is self-perpetuating, because it might make the school less appealing to parents of black and Latino kids, especially when there are so many schools in DC with much larger POC populations, many of them excellent schools.

But still: how did this happen in the first place? I just don't understand how a citywide school in DC gets to 60% white kids in the first place. I know Capitol Hill is increasingly very white, but SWS is currently in a flex space in Hill East which is much less white. And most other Capital Hill schools, except Brent, still have less than 50% white student populations. And other citywide schools and charters in the area (CHML, TR, Apple Tree) all have populations that are much more reflective of the city's overall population.

What's going on?

My childhood elementary school was 90% white.

And?

60% white is a low pct

60% of anything is not really diverse. 60% is a clear majority that can flex its power.

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, my kid and his classmates from SWS did not struggle when they transitioned to BASIS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW I don’t think SWS is uniquely bad at teaching math and no data seems to support that. I don’t love DCPS’ math curriculum though and think it doesn’t line up with iReady well[b], so it’s hard to know what to think of the assessments. Our kid goes to Mathnasium.

Teacher here and completely agree with this part, even though I think eureka. There's not enough time in the pacing to cover all the geometry and measurement domains, which lead to skewed i ready results

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps, but Washington Teachers Union's opposition to elementary school re-openings for two years during the pandemic certainly didn't help, and SWS' middling academic program hasn't improve matters. These days, SWS students are routinely are given good grades in math and ELA although they work a year or more behind grade level. I've heard similar stories about Brent, and Maury and Ludlow to a lesser extent. UMC Hill parents run to tutors more than my suburban friends with ES-age kids seem to. Parents who fuss about how white the school is are missing the forest for the trees. Shaky DCPS ES academics are a problem dwarfing mild racial imbalances.

? Not a teacher, but where does this assertion come from? When I look at what topics my kid has learned this year - in math at least, every single topic is on the Khan topic list for that grade. Doesn't seem like Khan lists anything additional either that wasn't covered. The school covered appropriate grade level math (with periodic standardized assessments like iready plus unit based quizzes)

The math instruction at SWS just isn't too hot. Great in theory, not so much in practice. Writing instruction is far worse. We meet SWS pals at Mathnasium. We hire a writing tutor with SWS buddies. Go into the upper grades with your eyes open, folks.

As a teacher, it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work. It's analogous to me saying that the widget production at your work isn't that hot, despite actually meeting all industry standards

What a condescending bunch of BS. So does that mean you also don't get to judge the food at a restaurant because you're not a professional chef? Please don't belittle parents when it's plain to see that the academics are not that hot.

Yes, we all know when food tastes good and when it doesn't. This is not the same. You don't like the way your child is taught math; that's different than it being taught poorly or incorrectly.

Also, using a standard of "hot or not that hot" is more fitting for MySpace that educational evaluatoon

You keep lecturing parents how stupid we are and then wonder why teachers unions have lost so much public goodwill in recent years.

When my child comes home and says that 1+1=3, am I seriously supposed to pretend that I'm too ignorant to see the academic deficiencies staring right in my face?! Am I also supposed to pretend the low standardized test scores are all wrong and that only the teachers know best?

When your upper ES student comes back and tells you 1+1=3 report back

What do you mean when you say low overall test scores? Are you talking about the fact that not all students are testing on grade level? Because, as a teacher who inherited a class with students as low as K/1 in fifth grade this year, I know that's not a legitimate standard to measure my effectiveness.

I want to add, nobody is calling you or any parent stupid. You chose to call out teachers for bad instruction and are now upset that they are defending themselves.

Once again you're obfuscating the issue. The PP teacher literally said that "it's wild that parents think they can make assertions like this without being experts in the work." The PP parents basically expressed concern about their own kids' lack of academic progress while being told by teachers to shut up because only teachers know better.

Same poster: do you think it's wrong for teachers to believe that they know better? We're experts in the field. We went to college to do this work. I think it's a fair assumption that we would know better in regards to ES math instruction

np: Teachers here love to tell patents that they are not qualified to have opinions. However, the truth is that a lot of parents also have relevant expertise. Some parents are or were teachers; some have expertise in the field; some work for educational suppliers; some have extensive experience working with children; etc etc.