Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What you're describing is the same story with the YY leadership since the get go. We aren't continuing on to DCI because we've had more than enough.
+1. This is why we wouldn't send our kid to DCI. In retrospect, we wish we had bailed on YY sooner.
Anonymous wrote:What you're describing is the same story with the YY leadership since the get go. We aren't continuing on to DCI because we've had more than enough.
Anonymous wrote:What you're describing is the same story with the YY leadership since the get go. We aren't continuing on to DCI because we've had more than enough.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Um, because they are inexperienced.
+1. They've only been in a senior position at this start up school, so they don't bring experience understanding how to do things at an established school. The top leadership tends to hire non-threatening suck ups into leadership positions as opposed to professionals who bring strong experience. This was a problem at our feeder charter too.
Non threatening suck ups? You know them personally? What makes you think that is what happened?
It looks like they tried to hire some outsiders with “experience” and had some fails.
There is plenty of experience to be had in growing with the school, understanding the history, knowing the kids and staff, and being generally understanding of the inner workings of the institution. Also, every leader has a first leadership position. Where else does one get experience?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Um, because they are inexperienced.
+1. They've only been in a senior position at this start up school, so they don't bring experience understanding how to do things at an established school. The top leadership tends to hire non-threatening suck ups into leadership positions as opposed to professionals who bring strong experience. This was a problem at our feeder charter too.
Anonymous wrote:Um, because they are inexperienced.
Anonymous wrote:I do not recommend DCI to anyone who has an alternative. I believe it only has a good reputation because there aren’t many other options in the city. 19:09 made some really solid observations (although I disagree with the point about sports since there are lunch clubs and after school options that aren’t competitive).
I’ll add:
Pros:
- International trips and a fairly large budget for clubs and events.
- Social justice focus and student advocacy. They have gender neutral student restrooms (not single stalls, but actual bathrooms).
Cons:
- Leaders are inexperienced, which has a ripple effect. Many of the people in high positions were founding teachers, and aren’t qualified for their job. As a result, really important teams like the discipline team suffer from ineffective leadership, and the school is chaotic.
- The school expanded too rapidly and it was impossible to fill all vacancies with quality educators. In fact, not all positions were filled last year. This results in a variety of classroom experiences and high turnover as previously mentioned.
- The chromebooks aren’t used as a tool to supplement learning when beneficial. There is too much reliance on the devices when it isn’t necessary.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Hardy for sure
Hardy has better math and ELA proficiency but I would wonder if there’s a difference between students who come from in boundary schools and from out-of-boundary schools. How do the out-of-boundary Hardy students compare to DCI students? If you are not in boundary, I would be concerned with defacto tracking.
Not a huge difference when it comes to math and ELA. Quick look up on the report card says on grade level or above math 45%, ELA 67% at Hardy. DCI math 41%, ELA 61%.
At risk at both schools pretty much the same.
But if you delve further, the DCI numbers are for BOTH the middle and high school, not just middle school.
Now if you look at Wilson’s stats, lower than both schools above, you see math 32%, ELA 58%.
Extrapolate from there however you want but DCI’s number is decent considering it’s for BOTH middle and high school.
Good point. How do you think the magnet schools fit into this? DCI and Hardy students go to Walls/Banneker/Ellington but are Hardy kids more likely to go to one of these schools, and DCI more likely to stay put at DCI?
Anonymous wrote:.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Hardy for sure
Hardy has better math and ELA proficiency but I would wonder if there’s a difference between students who come from in boundary schools and from out-of-boundary schools. How do the out-of-boundary Hardy students compare to DCI students? If you are not in boundary, I would be concerned with defacto tracking.
Not a huge difference when it comes to math and ELA. Quick look up on the report card says on grade level or above math 45%, ELA 67% at Hardy. DCI math 41%, ELA 61%.
At risk at both schools pretty much the same.
But if you delve further, the DCI numbers are for BOTH the middle and high school, not just middle school.
Now if you look at Wilson’s stats, lower than both schools above, you see math 32%, ELA 58%.
Extrapolate from there however you want but DCI’s number is decent considering it’s for BOTH middle and high school.
.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Hardy for sure
Hardy has better math and ELA proficiency but I would wonder if there’s a difference between students who come from in boundary schools and from out-of-boundary schools. How do the out-of-boundary Hardy students compare to DCI students? If you are not in boundary, I would be concerned with defacto tracking.