Anonymous wrote:We’re a Banneker family. If you go to school events there is a whole lot of emphasis on getting into college and this annoying celebration of scholarships awarded which makes little sense when (1) you start to see university scholarships as discounts rather than cash and (2) realize you can only send your kid to one university at a time.

They have an emphasis on “everybody getting into (and presumably going to) college.” I think that this is a great aspiration for a school where every student has demonstrated an interest in working hard regardless of academic ability.

We’re a Banneker family. If you go to school events there is a whole lot of emphasis on getting into college and this annoying celebration of scholarships awarded which makes little sense when (1) you start to see university scholarships as discounts rather than cash and (2) realize you can only send your kid to one university at a time.

They have an emphasis on “everybody getting into (and presumably going to) college.” I think that this is a great aspiration for a school where every student has demonstrated an interest in working hard regardless of academic ability.

One of the ways they meet this aspiration is by sending kids to HBCUs. These are also great for the affinities of many students and in many ways the affinities of Banneker itself (it feels like a little HBCU almost). If you see the requirements for these schools and their SAT averages, they are not very demanding.

Alabama A&M requires an 1130 for their HONORS program and a 990 for regular admission. Coppin State’s average is 950. “Top” HBCUs don’t have much higher requirements. Spelman has a 1200 SAT average, Morehouse, 1060. These universities want students from schools with cultures like Banneker, and recent news has shown smaller HBCUs are looking for students where they can get them. When these are the requirements, students have little incentive to try to score higher.

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious…I have a child at Walls and the school seems very focused on getting students ready for the SATs. All kids in 9th grade took the PSATs and encouraged the kids to closely evaluate the results and start studying NOW for the areas where they are weak. I thought to myself that this seems over the top as it’s only 9th grade. Does Banneker do the same? If not, does that account for the difference in scores?

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I'm sensitive because my DC attends Banneker, and I've been very happy with the program there. But based on what I've seen here and other posts, there is constant negativity about Banneker.

I guess I also have strong feelings because I taught kids who attended both Walls and Banneker and are successful. I've been around Banneker alum who are doing incredible things in all facets of DC life, from art to government and more. Yes, the scores are lower. Maybe because the net is a bit wider. Is that a bad thing? IMO, no. But many of those lower scoring students still get access to strong post-secondary opportunities due to their work at Banneker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.

How are you concluding that the "top 1/4" at Without Walls get 1400 plus and that the "bottom kids" get 1100? Nothing in the link you provided shows that. For all we know, the top performers at Banneker and Without Walls get the same SAT scores.

In any event, the gap in the average between the two schools has steadily decreased in recent years and presumably will continue to decrease.

This is basic math. The kids at both schools are not getting the same SAT scores when there is a big 200 point spread difference.

You don’t know exact numbers but above are averages which means many get this score and then you have some above and below the average. So if Walls has a 1300 average then it’s possible that 50% kids get this, 25% lower and 25% higher and there is your bell shape curve. Percentages may not be accurate but the gist is your bell shape curve.

There is not a significant number of students at Banneker getting high SAT scores of 1400 plus if the average is only 1100. It is nit possible because if there was, then the average would be higher.

Walls average is 1300 so yes, statistically there is a cohort getting higher than the average with 1400 plus

Also to add that there is no big group at Walls getting below 1100 because if there was, this would drive your average of 1300 down. Maybe an outlier few kids but not a big cohort if Walls average is 1300. It is not statistically possible. If there was in reality a big cohort below 1100, then that would tell you there is also a big cohort getting 1500 plus to get an average of 1300.

We know about 10% of kids at Walls, and about 25% of kids at Banneker (and also, for perspective, about 20% of kids at Basis, 50% at Latin, and 60% at J-R and DCI) fail to meet the College Board’s “college ready” benchmarks of 480 verbal and 530 math. OSSE publishes the numbers.

Where did you get this information? It’s certainly not included in the link previously posted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.

How are you concluding that the "top 1/4" at Without Walls get 1400 plus and that the "bottom kids" get 1100? Nothing in the link you provided shows that. For all we know, the top performers at Banneker and Without Walls get the same SAT scores.

In any event, the gap in the average between the two schools has steadily decreased in recent years and presumably will continue to decrease.

This is basic math. The kids at both schools are not getting the same SAT scores when there is a big 200 point spread difference.

You don’t know exact numbers but above are averages which means many get this score and then you have some above and below the average. So if Walls has a 1300 average then it’s possible that 50% kids get this, 25% lower and 25% higher and there is your bell shape curve. Percentages may not be accurate but the gist is your bell shape curve.

There is not a significant number of students at Banneker getting high SAT scores of 1400 plus if the average is only 1100. It is nit possible because if there was, then the average would be higher.

Walls average is 1300 so yes, statistically there is a cohort getting higher than the average with 1400 plus

Also to add that there is no big group at Walls getting below 1100 because if there was, this would drive your average of 1300 down. Maybe an outlier few kids but not a big cohort if Walls average is 1300. It is not statistically possible. If there was in reality a big cohort below 1100, then that would tell you there is also a big cohort getting 1500 plus to get an average of 1300.

We know about 10% of kids at Walls, and about 25% of kids at Banneker (and also, for perspective, about 20% of kids at Basis, 50% at Latin, and 60% at J-R and DCI) fail to meet the College Board’s “college ready” benchmarks of 480 verbal and 530 math. OSSE publishes the numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.

How are you concluding that the "top 1/4" at Without Walls get 1400 plus and that the "bottom kids" get 1100? Nothing in the link you provided shows that. For all we know, the top performers at Banneker and Without Walls get the same SAT scores.

In any event, the gap in the average between the two schools has steadily decreased in recent years and presumably will continue to decrease.

This is basic math. The kids at both schools are not getting the same SAT scores when there is a big 200 point spread difference.

You don’t know exact numbers but above are averages which means many get this score and then you have some above and below the average. So if Walls has a 1300 average then it’s possible that 50% kids get this, 25% lower and 25% higher and there is your bell shape curve. Percentages may not be accurate but the gist is your bell shape curve.

There is not a significant number of students at Banneker getting high SAT scores of 1400 plus if the average is only 1100. It is nit possible because if there was, then the average would be higher.

Walls average is 1300 so yes, statistically there is a cohort getting higher than the average with 1400 plus

Also to add that there is no big group at Walls getting below 1100 because if there was, this would drive your average of 1300 down. Maybe an outlier few kids but not a big cohort if Walls average is 1300. It is not statistically possible. If there was in reality a big cohort below 1100, then that would tell you there is also a big cohort getting 1500 plus to get an average of 1300.

We know about 10% of kids at Walls, and about 25% of kids at Banneker (and also, for perspective, about 20% of kids at Basis, 50% at Latin, and 60% at J-R and DCI) fail to meet the College Board’s “college ready” benchmarks of 480 verbal and 530 math. OSSE publishes the numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.

How are you concluding that the "top 1/4" at Without Walls get 1400 plus and that the "bottom kids" get 1100? Nothing in the link you provided shows that. For all we know, the top performers at Banneker and Without Walls get the same SAT scores.

In any event, the gap in the average between the two schools has steadily decreased in recent years and presumably will continue to decrease.

This is basic math. The kids at both schools are not getting the same SAT scores when there is a big 200 point spread difference.

You don’t know exact numbers but above are averages which means many get this score and then you have some above and below the average. So if Walls has a 1300 average then it’s possible that 50% kids get this, 25% lower and 25% higher and there is your bell shape curve. Percentages may not be accurate but the gist is your bell shape curve.

There is not a significant number of students at Banneker getting high SAT scores of 1400 plus if the average is only 1100. It is nit possible because if there was, then the average would be higher.

Walls average is 1300 so yes, statistically there is a cohort getting higher than the average with 1400 plus

Also to add that there is no big group at Walls getting below 1100 because if there was, this would drive your average of 1300 down. Maybe an outlier few kids but not a big cohort if Walls average is 1300. It is not statistically possible. If there was in reality a big cohort below 1100, then that would tell you there is also a big cohort getting 1500 plus to get an average of 1300.

We know about 10% of kids at Walls, and about 25% of kids at Banneker (and also, for perspective, about 20% of kids at Basis, 50% at Latin, and 60% at J-R and DCI) fail to meet the College Board’s “college ready” benchmarks of 480 verbal and 530 math. OSSE publishes the numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.

How are you concluding that the "top 1/4" at Without Walls get 1400 plus and that the "bottom kids" get 1100? Nothing in the link you provided shows that. For all we know, the top performers at Banneker and Without Walls get the same SAT scores.

In any event, the gap in the average between the two schools has steadily decreased in recent years and presumably will continue to decrease.

This is basic math. The kids at both schools are not getting the same SAT scores when there is a big 200 point spread difference.

You don’t know exact numbers but above are averages which means many get this score and then you have some above and below the average. So if Walls has a 1300 average then it’s possible that 50% kids get this, 25% lower and 25% higher and there is your bell shape curve. Percentages may not be accurate but the gist is your bell shape curve.

There is not a significant number of students at Banneker getting high SAT scores of 1400 plus if the average is only 1100. It is nit possible because if there was, then the average would be higher.

Walls average is 1300 so yes, statistically there is a cohort getting higher than the average with 1400 plus

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.

How are you concluding that the "top 1/4" at Without Walls get 1400 plus and that the "bottom kids" get 1100? Nothing in the link you provided shows that. For all we know, the top performers at Banneker and Without Walls get the same SAT scores.

In any event, the gap in the average between the two schools has steadily decreased in recent years and presumably will continue to decrease.

This is basic math. The kids at both schools are not getting the same SAT scores when there is a big 200 point spread difference.

You don’t know exact numbers but above are averages which means many get this score and then you have some above and below the average. So if Walls has a 1300 average then it’s possible that 50% kids get this, 25% lower and 25% higher and there is your bell shape curve. Percentages may not be accurate but the gist is your bell shape curve.

There is not a significant number of students at Banneker getting high SAT scores of 1400 plus if the average is only 1100. It is nit possible because if there was, then the average would be higher.

Walls average is 1300 so yes, statistically there is a cohort getting higher than the average with 1400 plus

Also to add that there is no big group at Walls getting below 1100 because if there was, this would drive your average of 1300 down. Maybe an outlier few kids but not a big cohort if Walls average is 1300. It is not statistically possible. If there was in reality a big cohort below 1100, then that would tell you there is also a big cohort getting 1500 plus to get an average of 1300.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.

How are you concluding that the "top 1/4" at Without Walls get 1400 plus and that the "bottom kids" get 1100? Nothing in the link you provided shows that. For all we know, the top performers at Banneker and Without Walls get the same SAT scores.

In any event, the gap in the average between the two schools has steadily decreased in recent years and presumably will continue to decrease.

This is basic math. The kids at both schools are not getting the same SAT scores when there is a big 200 point spread difference.

You don’t know exact numbers but above are averages which means many get this score and then you have some above and below the average. So if Walls has a 1300 average then it’s possible that 50% kids get this, 25% lower and 25% higher and there is your bell shape curve. Percentages may not be accurate but the gist is your bell shape curve.

There is not a significant number of students at Banneker getting high SAT scores of 1400 plus if the average is only 1100. It is nit possible because if there was, then the average would be higher.

Walls average is 1300 so yes, statistically there is a cohort getting higher than the average with 1400 plus

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.

How are you concluding that the "top 1/4" at Without Walls get 1400 plus and that the "bottom kids" get 1100? Nothing in the link you provided shows that. For all we know, the top performers at Banneker and Without Walls get the same SAT scores.

In any event, the gap in the average between the two schools has steadily decreased in recent years and presumably will continue to decrease.

Anonymous wrote:

Walls average is much better. You have bottom kids getting 1100 which is not great and mediocre. But at least you have kids at the top 1/4 getting 1400 plus which is not happening at Banneker at all. Maybe an outlier here or there but nothing of significant numbers.