PP likes to pretend there is no baseline - but the reality of it is that BASIS has already done this already with their accelerated LEAP program, which already has a proven and demonstrated track record working in a half dozen schools in Arizona - and they have the same program on track for DC. They have already successfully put a great many students through Algebra I in 5th and 6th grade, placed there via testing, and already had them successfully continue on through Calculus and other advanced math courses.

It's not as though BASIS DC is some speculative, brand new thing that someone just dreamed up on the back of a napkin yesterday, and is now happening in a vacuum - it's been in the making since the 1990s. In addition to Math, BASIS also has an established track record in their LEAP programs for accelerating English, Science and History and the LEAP students begin taking AP courses in 8th grade. Our son is in BASIS DC and is on track to take these LEAP courses and is excelling in Algebra and his other courses. For us it's real, it's genuine and we ARE seeing success. Let's stop pretending that none of this is workable, that none of this has ever been tried and that the BASIS model is a brand new, completely untested, far-out experiment - because it's anything but.

And, it boggles the mind that people would be so staunchly opposed to the possibility of the DC area ever getting any kind of accelerated curriculum option. Why must we fight to deliberately keep the bar extremely low and deny students any option of ever having a more robust curriculum? Can anyone out there name any other free public option in the DC area that offers in this kind of accelerated program? I can't.

Anonymous wrote:Math acceleration is having a math class that is beyond the typical offered to students at a given grade. i.e. 5th grade Algebra. whether or not a given student is successful does not affect whether a school offers accelerated math. Success as a criteria is interesting in that success is highly subjective. Offering or not offering the class is objective.

Right you are!

And by that logic, I'd like to suggest that Basis begin offering a class in Advanced Algorithms, next semester - if not sooner.

Granted, it's actually a graduate-level seminar at MIT, but who cares? According to the PP, the point is apparently to offer the class - not whether or not any of the students can actually pick their noses through it, much less learn and master the material. Too bad that taking it even on a Pass/Fail BASIS would still yield poor results.

Math acceleration is having a math class that is beyond the typical offered to students at a given grade. i.e. 5th grade Algebra. whether or not a given student is successful does not affect whether a school offers accelerated math. Success as a criteria is interesting in that success is highly subjective. Offering or not offering the class is objective.

Math acceleration at BASIS is objective fact, but PP can't seem to get beyond her own non-objective bias and own agenda, to be able to understand that.

Not a fact if it isn't successful. Merely an assertion.

Anonymous wrote:
What "agenda" and what "boosterism"?

That's a decision point, PP expressed clear interest in math advancement, that's something Basis definitely offers, as opposed to Deal.

Apple, meet orange. End of story.



I think the point is that there is a Basis booster who never misses an opportunity to promote how supposedly great the school is, without any empirical evidence. Some people are tired of it. Yes, you love Basis and want to promote it, but for now you have no data. Stop pretending you've got the answer to a complex problem.

You don't see Latin and Deal acting so desperate.

(BTW, I have no vested interest in any of these schools.)


I'm the PP who called out the booster and her agenda and that is exactly the point I was making. Thanks, PP.


^ In this case you have no valid point to make, you are basically speaking out of turn by referring to lack of data on outcomes and trying to answer a different question than what was asked. OP was specifically asking for comparisons between Deal and Basis, and expressly mentioned opportunity for challenge and advancement in Math and English.

The FACT is that Basis DOES accelerate in Math, more so than Deal. That IS "empirical evidence", that IS data, that's a basic, simple, quantifiable and irrefutable statement of fact as opposed to simply being "some zealous booster's opinion" - and as such, there's no "desperation" or "agenda" involved in making that factual statement.

And whatever your own agenda or "vested interest" is, it is certainly evident that it includes the need to desperately take every opportunity possible to trash anyone who talks positively about Basis.

Oh, goodness, booster, you really need to calm down. You're not fighting some valiant fight against an enemy desperate to trash anyone who talks positively about BASIS. You are absolutely paranoid when you talk like that.

As for acceleration, many, many people have tried to tell you this, but you just don't seem to get it. BASIS has been open for a short time. It cannot assert success in anything. The kids who are accelerated in Math? Have. not. successfully. passed. the. class. So, comparing what BASIS does with what an established school (with, certainly, actual data on the success or failure of their programs/policies) is complete foolishness and nothing remotely resembling "empirical evidence" of anything other than BASIS says it's so, because it says it's so.

Seriously, booster, step off the ledge and let the school prove itself. What are you so afraid of?

Math acceleration at BASIS is objective fact, but PP can't seem to get beyond her own non-objective bias and own agenda, to be able to understand that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BASIS booster never misses an opportunity. Hope you see her agenda, PP.

The title of the thread is "Deal or BASIS for DCs? Advice needed.". Isn't that an invitation to BASIS boosters to boost?

Only if the booster is objective. If not, the advice isn't very helpful.

Anonymous wrote:BASIS booster never misses an opportunity. Hope you see her agenda, PP.

The title of the thread is "Deal or BASIS for DCs? Advice needed.". Isn't that an invitation to BASIS boosters to boost?

Anonymous wrote:^^ Isn't the existence of this newer group of parents and their demands to be considered educational progress? It's the nature of forward momentum and change.

It is progress, but demographic change means growing pains. Just ask GOP voices willing to concede as much.

13:37 the workshop method doesn't work well, true, but it's also problematic that there are weak students in the English classes along with a good many who are more than a little advanced. Without DC-CAS scores to worry about, the wide ability/preparation range would concern me less, but the teachers are under tremendous pressure to bring up the bottom. Public school classes are too big as it is. Bring on honors English classes at Deal. If BASIS and other DC public middle schools start tracking for middle school English, Deal won't be able to resist forever. We haven't seen a willingness to separate out weak students since the early 1980s, despite several decades of complaints from parents that this is not done, and the arrangement is surely here to stay.

^^ Isn't the existence of this newer group of parents and their demands to be considered educational progress? It's the nature of forward momentum and change.

My take on the dynamic of this thread is that a new generation of parents is scoping out Deal and Basis when, just a few years ago, they wouldn't have been looking at DC middle schools at all. They are, on average, more demanding consumers than the parents who stuck with DCPS beyond ES in the past: they see advanced courses offered across the board in many suburban middle schools and wonder why they aren't offered outside math in DCPS middle schools and DC charter schools.

These folks tend not to be as well versed in DC politics as an earlier generation of high-SES parents who stuck with public middle schools. They're relative newcomers to the city, not Basis or Deal boosters but the educational equivalent of "undecided voters" in an increasingly competitive race. The fact that Basis is now on the scene tracking more than Deal is shaking things up. Fine. It's not as though Deal's curriculum doesn't invite tweaking. Pretty clearly, kids who can't test proficient in middle school and kids who attend Johns Hopkins CTY camps would be better served by more tracking, as long as it's not overly rigid and most of the best teachers aren't assigned honors classes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What "agenda" and what "boosterism"?

That's a decision point, PP expressed clear interest in math advancement, that's something Basis definitely offers, as opposed to Deal.

Apple, meet orange. End of story.



I think the point is that there is a Basis booster who never misses an opportunity to promote how supposedly great the school is, without any empirical evidence. Some people are tired of it. Yes, you love Basis and want to promote it, but for now you have no data. Stop pretending you've got the answer to a complex problem.

You don't see Latin and Deal acting so desperate.

(BTW, I have no vested interest in any of these schools.)

I'm the PP who called out the booster and her agenda and that is exactly the point I was making. Thanks, PP.

^ In this case you have no valid point to make, you are basically speaking out of turn by referring to lack of data on outcomes and trying to answer a different question than what was asked. OP was specifically asking for comparisons between Deal and Basis, and expressly mentioned opportunity for challenge and advancement in Math and English.

The FACT is that Basis DOES accelerate in Math, more so than Deal. That IS "empirical evidence", that IS data, that's a basic, simple, quantifiable and irrefutable statement of fact as opposed to simply being "some zealous booster's opinion" - and as such, there's no "desperation" or "agenda" involved in making that factual statement.

And whatever your own agenda or "vested interest" is, it is certainly evident that it includes the need to desperately take every opportunity possible to trash anyone who talks positively about Basis.

Anonymous wrote:
What "agenda" and what "boosterism"?

That's a decision point, PP expressed clear interest in math advancement, that's something Basis definitely offers, as opposed to Deal.

Apple, meet orange. End of story.



I think the point is that there is a Basis booster who never misses an opportunity to promote how supposedly great the school is, without any empirical evidence. Some people are tired of it. Yes, you love Basis and want to promote it, but for now you have no data. Stop pretending you've got the answer to a complex problem.

You don't see Latin and Deal acting so desperate.

(BTW, I have no vested interest in any of these schools.)

I'm the PP who called out the booster and her agenda and that is exactly the point I was making. Thanks, PP.

Anonymous wrote:The fact that your child may not be challenged in English may be because they are using that awful workshop method rather than the composition of the kids in the class. I have a kid at Deal that does struggle in English due to ADHD, but is not this year and my sense is that the workshop methodology is supposed to make them like to read and write, but really dumbs down the content. This is the one place I am not really happy at Deal and I have communicated this directly to the school. Personally I think it may be worth communicating on something the school can change than what they cannot i.e. the kids that attend the school.

Speaking of English, it's "kid/s who" not "that".

Anonymous wrote:Oh come on, you folks are puzzled by how parents have started to complain that there isn't tracking outside math? MoCo is tightening up access to above grade level math instruction in both ES (via Curriculum 2.0) and MS. They're over-correcting for a long-standing problem, widespread over-acceleration. What would I do for over-acceleration as my kid's problem. Parental push-back has been strong in MoCo so balance will surely return shortly.

If your kid excels at English or science, why do you want him/her in class with kids who struggle with basic skills (be they IB or OOB kids)? Deal doesn't do advanced courses outside math because most of the kids in them would be AA or Latino, not because DCPS is following sound logic in sticking with in-class differentiation beyond ES. They come under fire for having so many Asian and white kids in 7th grade algebra. My kid hasn't been remotely challenged by English, or challenged much in science, in 6th grade. He would have been a good candidate for 6th grade algebra (which I hear BASIS is teaching). We're on the fence about staying.

The fact that your child may not be challenged in English may be because they are using that awful workshop method rather than the composition of the kids in the class. I have a kid at Deal that does struggle in English due to ADHD, but is not this year and my sense is that the workshop methodology is supposed to make them like to read and write, but really dumbs down the content. This is the one place I am not really happy at Deal and I have communicated this directly to the school. Personally I think it may be worth communicating on something the school can change than what they cannot i.e. the kids that attend the school.