Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why, if they care as much about diversity as much as they say they do, they could take steps aside from replication.

1-eliminate sibling preference (not required to offer it)
2- acquire a second building and enlarge the class sizes to 150-200 students

Take students after 10th grade, and/or back-fill mid-year, like DCPS schools have to do. Stop taking the easy road and accept a fair share of the high-mobility students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why, if they care as much about diversity as much as they say they do, they could take steps aside from replication.

1-eliminate sibling preference (not required to offer it)
2- acquire a second building and enlarge the class sizes to 150-200 students

Except that sibling preference benefits both high and low SES students. The at risk preference seems like the most obvious way to fix the problem.

Anonymous wrote:This is why, if they care as much about diversity as much as they say they do, they could take steps aside from replication.

1-eliminate sibling preference (not required to offer it)
2- acquire a second building and enlarge the class sizes to 150-200 students

Anonymous wrote:This is why, if they care as much about diversity as much as they say they do, they could take steps aside from replication.

1-eliminate sibling preference (not required to offer it)
2- acquire a second building and enlarge the class sizes to 150-200 students

Anonymous wrote:Any rumors on where in Ward 7? It could have a big impact on cap hill middle schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who does know how to educate at-risk minority kids outside creepy boot camp programs rejected by white/high SES families, e.g. KIPP and SEED? No school can be all things to all comers.

Charter schools need to be able to educate all comers, that's why they get public money and can't turn away students.

+1. And if they can't, they should be shut down. +1

Re Latin what is bizarre is that they were GOOD AT THIS in the early years. As the school has become more affluent, the performance of its higher need subgroups has declined. It is weird to me that they weren't already on this problem, but rather had to be pushed by PCSB to come up with a plan to get approved to replicate.

OK, but it's still great for the City that Latin exists. We have a bunch of UMC friends and neighbors EotP who would have bailed for the burbs without Latin. Who would have won in that case, other than suburban real estate agents? How do poor kids benefit when high SES families vote with their feet from our public schools after ES?

How do poor kids in any way benefit from their sequestered presence at Latin?

As a minority who grew up poor. I can't count the ways I benefitted from going to middle and high school mostly with UMC students, not just having them in the building, but in almost all my classes. The worlds of my white classmates were much bigger than mine, for for the most part, a lot happier, which made a huge impression on me. Their presence in my school meant that a PTA raised piles of money for the school. I learned to copy the confident way well-off classmates spoke and acted, which helped me fit in once I got to an elite college. I also befriended well-off kids whose professional parents encouraged me to apply to top colleges and even helped me navigate the application process. Hello - school experiences for poor kids are not just about scoring well on standardized tests.

Pretty much same here. Grew up as a child of immigrants, lower middle class family, and attended many classes with my more affluent white classmates. Most of the minority kids in my school were from working class families, or bused in from the projects. I also benefitted, both from the bolded and because my I saw that these classmates had different goals--I then knew to set the bar higher in terms of academic performance and college aspirations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who does know how to educate at-risk minority kids outside creepy boot camp programs rejected by white/high SES families, e.g. KIPP and SEED? No school can be all things to all comers.

Charter schools need to be able to educate all comers, that's why they get public money and can't turn away students.

+1. And if they can't, they should be shut down. +1

Re Latin what is bizarre is that they were GOOD AT THIS in the early years. As the school has become more affluent, the performance of its higher need subgroups has declined. It is weird to me that they weren't already on this problem, but rather had to be pushed by PCSB to come up with a plan to get approved to replicate.

OK, but it's still great for the City that Latin exists. We have a bunch of UMC friends and neighbors EotP who would have bailed for the burbs without Latin. Who would have won in that case, other than suburban real estate agents? How do poor kids benefit when high SES families vote with their feet from our public schools after ES?

How do poor kids in any way benefit from their sequestered presence at Latin?

As a minority who grew up poor. I can't count the ways I benefitted from going to middle and high school mostly with UMC students, not just having them in the building, but in almost all my classes. The worlds of my white classmates were much bigger than mine, for for the most part, a lot happier, which made a huge impression on me. Their presence in my school meant that a PTA raised piles of money for the school. I learned to copy the confident way well-off classmates spoke and acted, which helped me fit in once I got to an elite college. I also befriended well-off kids whose professional parents encouraged me to apply to top colleges and even helped me navigate the application process. Hello - school experiences for poor kids are not just about scoring well on standardized tests.

Pretty much same here. Grew up as a child of immigrants, lower middle class family, and attended many classes with my more affluent white classmates. Most of the minority kids in my school were from working class families, or bused in from the projects. I also benefitted, both from the bolded and because my I saw that these classmates had different goals--I then knew to set the bar higher in terms of academic performance and college aspirations.

The data shows that at Latin kids fitting that descriptions are unlikely to succeed. So what exactly is going on there? It's a serious question.

I totally hear you and I'm with you on the NEED to have better integrated schools. My point is that Washington Latin is not a successful school on this front. PP was selling retaining UMC families from leaving DC and that's the wrong lens. Those families need to be willing to expose their children to a more diverse range of peers economically, socially, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who does know how to educate at-risk minority kids outside creepy boot camp programs rejected by white/high SES families, e.g. KIPP and SEED? No school can be all things to all comers.

Charter schools need to be able to educate all comers, that's why they get public money and can't turn away students.

+1. And if they can't, they should be shut down. +1

Re Latin what is bizarre is that they were GOOD AT THIS in the early years. As the school has become more affluent, the performance of its higher need subgroups has declined. It is weird to me that they weren't already on this problem, but rather had to be pushed by PCSB to come up with a plan to get approved to replicate.

OK, but it's still great for the City that Latin exists. We have a bunch of UMC friends and neighbors EotP who would have bailed for the burbs without Latin. Who would have won in that case, other than suburban real estate agents? How do poor kids benefit when high SES families vote with their feet from our public schools after ES?

How do poor kids in any way benefit from their sequestered presence at Latin?

As a minority who grew up poor. I can't count the ways I benefitted from going to middle and high school mostly with UMC students, not just having them in the building, but in almost all my classes. The worlds of my white classmates were much bigger than mine, for for the most part, a lot happier, which made a huge impression on me. Their presence in my school meant that a PTA raised piles of money for the school. I learned to copy the confident way well-off classmates spoke and acted, which helped me fit in once I got to an elite college. I also befriended well-off kids whose professional parents encouraged me to apply to top colleges and even helped me navigate the application process. Hello - school experiences for poor kids are not just about scoring well on standardized tests.

Pretty much same here. Grew up as a child of immigrants, lower middle class family, and attended many classes with my more affluent white classmates. Most of the minority kids in my school were from working class families, or bused in from the projects. I also benefitted, both from the bolded and because my I saw that these classmates had different goals--I then knew to set the bar higher in terms of academic performance and college aspirations.

The data shows that at Latin kids fitting that descriptions are unlikely to succeed. So what exactly is going on there? It's a serious question.

I totally hear you and I'm with you on the NEED to have better integrated schools. My point is that Washington Latin is not a successful school on this front. PP was selling retaining UMC families from leaving DC and that's the wrong lens. Those families need to be willing to expose their children to a more diverse range of peers economically, socially, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who does know how to educate at-risk minority kids outside creepy boot camp programs rejected by white/high SES families, e.g. KIPP and SEED? No school can be all things to all comers.

Charter schools need to be able to educate all comers, that's why they get public money and can't turn away students.

+1. And if they can't, they should be shut down. +1

Re Latin what is bizarre is that they were GOOD AT THIS in the early years. As the school has become more affluent, the performance of its higher need subgroups has declined. It is weird to me that they weren't already on this problem, but rather had to be pushed by PCSB to come up with a plan to get approved to replicate.

OK, but it's still great for the City that Latin exists. We have a bunch of UMC friends and neighbors EotP who would have bailed for the burbs without Latin. Who would have won in that case, other than suburban real estate agents? How do poor kids benefit when high SES families vote with their feet from our public schools after ES?

How do poor kids in any way benefit from their sequestered presence at Latin?

As a minority who grew up poor. I can't count the ways I benefitted from going to middle and high school mostly with UMC students, not just having them in the building, but in almost all my classes. The worlds of my white classmates were much bigger than mine, for for the most part, a lot happier, which made a huge impression on me. Their presence in my school meant that a PTA raised piles of money for the school. I learned to copy the confident way well-off classmates spoke and acted, which helped me fit in once I got to an elite college. I also befriended well-off kids whose professional parents encouraged me to apply to top colleges and even helped me navigate the application process. Hello - school experiences for poor kids are not just about scoring well on standardized tests.

Pretty much same here. Grew up as a child of immigrants, lower middle class family, and attended many classes with my more affluent white classmates. Most of the minority kids in my school were from working class families, or bused in from the projects. I also benefitted, both from the bolded and because my I saw that these classmates had different goals--I then knew to set the bar higher in terms of academic performance and college aspirations.

The data shows that at Latin kids fitting that descriptions are unlikely to succeed. So what exactly is going on there? It's a serious question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who does know how to educate at-risk minority kids outside creepy boot camp programs rejected by white/high SES families, e.g. KIPP and SEED? No school can be all things to all comers.

Charter schools need to be able to educate all comers, that's why they get public money and can't turn away students.

+1. And if they can't, they should be shut down. +1

Re Latin what is bizarre is that they were GOOD AT THIS in the early years. As the school has become more affluent, the performance of its higher need subgroups has declined. It is weird to me that they weren't already on this problem, but rather had to be pushed by PCSB to come up with a plan to get approved to replicate.

OK, but it's still great for the City that Latin exists. We have a bunch of UMC friends and neighbors EotP who would have bailed for the burbs without Latin. Who would have won in that case, other than suburban real estate agents? How do poor kids benefit when high SES families vote with their feet from our public schools after ES?

How do poor kids in any way benefit from their sequestered presence at Latin?

As a minority who grew up poor. I can't count the ways I benefitted from going to middle and high school mostly with UMC students, not just having them in the building, but in almost all my classes. The worlds of my white classmates were much bigger than mine, for for the most part, a lot happier, which made a huge impression on me. Their presence in my school meant that a PTA raised piles of money for the school. I learned to copy the confident way well-off classmates spoke and acted, which helped me fit in once I got to an elite college. I also befriended well-off kids whose professional parents encouraged me to apply to top colleges and even helped me navigate the application process. Hello - school experiences for poor kids are not just about scoring well on standardized tests.

Pretty much same here. Grew up as a child of immigrants, lower middle class family, and attended many classes with my more affluent white classmates. Most of the minority kids in my school were from working class families, or bused in from the projects. I also benefitted, both from the bolded and because my I saw that these classmates had different goals--I then knew to set the bar higher in terms of academic performance and college aspirations.

The data shows that at Latin kids fitting that descriptions are unlikely to succeed. So what exactly is going on there? It's a serious question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who does know how to educate at-risk minority kids outside creepy boot camp programs rejected by white/high SES families, e.g. KIPP and SEED? No school can be all things to all comers.

Charter schools need to be able to educate all comers, that's why they get public money and can't turn away students.

+1. And if they can't, they should be shut down. +1

Re Latin what is bizarre is that they were GOOD AT THIS in the early years. As the school has become more affluent, the performance of its higher need subgroups has declined. It is weird to me that they weren't already on this problem, but rather had to be pushed by PCSB to come up with a plan to get approved to replicate.

OK, but it's still great for the City that Latin exists. We have a bunch of UMC friends and neighbors EotP who would have bailed for the burbs without Latin. Who would have won in that case, other than suburban real estate agents? How do poor kids benefit when high SES families vote with their feet from our public schools after ES?

How do poor kids in any way benefit from their sequestered presence at Latin?

As a minority who grew up poor. I can't count the ways I benefitted from going to middle and high school mostly with UMC students, not just having them in the building, but in almost all my classes. The worlds of my white classmates were much bigger than mine, for for the most part, a lot happier, which made a huge impression on me. Their presence in my school meant that a PTA raised piles of money for the school. I learned to copy the confident way well-off classmates spoke and acted, which helped me fit in once I got to an elite college. I also befriended well-off kids whose professional parents encouraged me to apply to top colleges and even helped me navigate the application process. Hello - school experiences for poor kids are not just about scoring well on standardized tests.

Pretty much same here. Grew up as a child of immigrants, lower middle class family, and attended many classes with my more affluent white classmates. Most of the minority kids in my school were from working class families, or bused in from the projects. I also benefitted, both from the bolded and because my I saw that these classmates had different goals--I then knew to set the bar higher in terms of academic performance and college aspirations.