Another rising K parent here who never thought of YY serving the bilingual community. I don't believe any charter's claims of what community it serves, since in fact the more popular ones serve only those families who get lucky in the lottery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a YY parent, I would have to say the school is NOT rigorous. The instruction in Chinese is challenging for many children. The instruction in English is sub-par and of concern.

I also agree completely with the ABC former YY parent who is posting here.

YY is Chinese for white people. Period. Unless there is a significant change in admin, I don't see the school improving much in the near future.

Needless to say, we're on our way out. YY is a nice idea and there are a lot of parents in serious denial about the school culture and rigor who post early and often on DCUM. It doesn't change the reality of the school though.

I guess we can all wait for the DCCAS scores this year to be the judge. They should be better this year since nearly all the parents who can afford it are paying for tutors (in both English and Chinese) to make up for YY's substandard instruction.

As the ABC poster who withdrew my kid, I appreciate this post. YY IS Chinese for white people,and black people, to the extent that it loses the forest for the trees on some levels, although the kids' Mandarin isn't bad. We weren't too happy with the instruction in English either, although the aftercare program was great. Back in our WOP school, challenge has returned.

What YY has done is to attract just enough ethnic Chinese, and other parents with a strong connection to China, to embolden it to claim that it serves the bilingual community well, when it doesn't. What you get are the school's movers and shakers, almost all white and black, telling the Chinese about their culture (no prejudice!) and the advantages of learning their language. While there are Chinese who don't mind--they focus on the language learning and leave it at that--most do and stay away, or leave. After pulling out, Chinese friends joked that we'd last longer than they expected.

Is this truly how the PA wants YY to work? There is no value in taking a culture for what it is, vs. presenting a DC Charter concocted ideal? I found the Chinese teachers tend to be painfully polite and deferential to admin, not wanting to offend their foreign hosts, or jeopardize their visa status and hard currency salaries. Without many Chinese adults with US citizenship, or permanent residency, on hand, who calls YY out on some of its most egregious cultural failings? Who provides insight that, while not PC, is at least grounded?

I'm the parent of a rising K student and this is the first time I've heard of this. It would never occur to me to question how well YY "serves the bilingual community" nor frankly, do I care. All I know is that my DC is speaking and reading Mandarin whereas before he entered school last fall, he knew no Mandarin at all. Pretty damn amazing. I think they did a great job and DC will be returning for K.

Anonymous wrote:As a YY parent, I would have to say the school is NOT rigorous. The instruction in Chinese is challenging for many children. The instruction in English is sub-par and of concern.

I also agree completely with the ABC former YY parent who is posting here.

YY is Chinese for white people. Period. Unless there is a significant change in admin, I don't see the school improving much in the near future.

Needless to say, we're on our way out. YY is a nice idea and there are a lot of parents in serious denial about the school culture and rigor who post early and often on DCUM. It doesn't change the reality of the school though.

I guess we can all wait for the DCCAS scores this year to be the judge. They should be better this year since nearly all the parents who can afford it are paying for tutors (in both English and Chinese) to make up for YY's substandard instruction.

As the ABC poster who withdrew my kid, I appreciate this post. YY IS Chinese for white people,and black people, to the extent that it loses the forest for the trees on some levels, although the kids' Mandarin isn't bad. We weren't too happy with the instruction in English either, although the aftercare program was great. Back in our WOP school, challenge has returned.

What YY has done is to attract just enough ethnic Chinese, and other parents with a strong connection to China, to embolden it to claim that it serves the bilingual community well, when it doesn't. What you get are the school's movers and shakers, almost all white and black, telling the Chinese about their culture (no prejudice!) and the advantages of learning their language. While there are Chinese who don't mind--they focus on the language learning and leave it at that--most do and stay away, or leave. After pulling out, Chinese friends joked that we'd last longer than they expected.

Is this truly how the PA wants YY to work? There is no value in taking a culture for what it is, vs. presenting a DC Charter concocted ideal? I found the Chinese teachers tend to be painfully polite and deferential to admin, not wanting to offend their foreign hosts, or jeopardize their visa status and hard currency salaries. Without many Chinese adults with US citizenship, or permanent residency, on hand, who calls YY out on some of its most egregious cultural failings? Who provides insight that, while not PC, is at least grounded?

Anonymous wrote:It is hard when YY doesn't try hard. Where’s the outreach? My family frequents venues popular with area E. Asians (certain supermarkets, dim sum places, cultural centers, heritage language schools), as well as reads Chinese newspapers and watches ethnic TV geared to local consumption. YY has little or no presence where the Chinese are. And, yes, having a black principal who doesn’t speak Chinese well certainly doesn't help. Argue that we know "nil" about the school, fine, but we know our culture well enough to get that the make-up of the administration transmits a clear message "school unwilling to meet Chinese community halfway.” The arrangement wouldn’t be objectionable if public monies weren’t behind charters. We aren't involved enough to "hate" YY.

Wait, you think that the use of public funds mandates the use of racial prejudice when making hiring decisions?

(In case you really believe this: it doesn't. In fact, the opposite is true.)