I'm a teacher. Here's what I would suggest.
First of all, go in assuming competence. Assume thwt the parents, teacher, admins are all not only doing their best but also know what they are doing. You may later find that this is untrue- but if you don't start there you're not going to get anywhere.
First thing: ask the teacher what she needs. Some teachers can do wish lists, other can't or won't for good reasons. So start by asking. I often need supplies thwt you wouldn't think of necessarily- masking tape, kid pencils. Posterboard. Or maybe the teacher wants parents to help with recess or reading groups or whatever. But maybe not- as any teacher will tell you, sometimes having parents in the classroom is far more trouble than it's worth.
After that, though, I think your best bet is more policy based. Use every resource and connection you have to push for better training for teachers. Or for a better free breakfast and lunch program, or better and more comprehensive counseling and sped services, because even the greatest teachers in the world are stymied by kids who are starving, abused, homeless. Look at programs that truly offer wraparound services and see what you can emulate. Fundraise for more 1:1 aides for the kids who really need them. Make sure, though, that you are talking to your kids teacher in all of this. Teaching is HARD. it's almost impossible to describe how hard to people who've never done it. It's easy for us to feel attacked because we so often are- but meanwhile we are thinking about your kids constantly, waking in the night to contemplate ways to help them, throwing our entire selves into helping other peoples children. So talk to the teachers, first. Make sure you aren't making them feel attacked even more. Teachers usually know what they need, what their school needs, and should have invaluable suggestions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In DC proper, Van Ness has the highest per capita of PHds. I just learned that a few weeks ago.

How many of those PhDs were earned at Van Ness's own UDC?

Like PhD candidates moved there so they could walk to school? not a very clever proposition.

Anonymous wrote:In DC proper, Van Ness has the highest per capita of PHds. I just learned that a few weeks ago.

How many of those PhDs were earned at Van Ness's own UDC?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ One thing that is unusual in DC is that given its nature of being home to so much policy, research and analysis, there are more PhD's per capita in DC than there are in just about any other city in the US. And, a significant percentage of them are white. And, quite likely, in those highly-educated households, education is heavily emphasized and reinforced at home. As such, it would stand to reason that many of the white kids in DC who come from those households would score quite highly. As opposed to a white blue collar community in coal mining country, where the white kids aren't anywhere near as likely to come up with similar high scores. There are a lot of factors involved.

I don't think this is true. It used to be, anyhow, that the place with the largest number of PhDs per capita in the U.S. was Los Alamos, followed by Bethesda.There are far more PhD requiring jobs at the NIH, NCI, Army Research Labs, Naval testing site, 270 biotech corridor firms than in all the DC think tanks and most of the people in those MD based PhD requiring jobs live in Montgomery County, not the District. And a much greater proportion of them than you seem to think are not white.

In general, this perseverative need to conflate race and the appeal of a school and educational attainment is goofy.

Although we all have our biases and in regards to the comparisons of educational performance of affluent kids in the DC area vs. elsewhere, I agree education outstrips income here by a lot and I don't find it remarkable that the kid of an NIH scientists and UMD professor would have much higher test scores than those of a much wealthier stock brokers kid in the NYC suburbs.

In DC proper, Van Ness has the highest per capita of PHds. I just learned that a few weeks ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can I just throw in there, that non High SES parents can be involved and provide resources as well. The original question, as pointed out was very off-putting. Yes, you can make a significant impact on the school by bringing in resources, but the school won't change if you come in and act as if you are better able to help than those with less disposable income. Middle class and lower income parents may also have time to contribute and will surely have useful talents. It becomes a matter of outreach and engagement, which will have to be your first step if you really want to make a difference.

Nah, neither actually equate to any real results.

Many parents are very aware of the school and needs but simply can't be engaged for various reasons. Lower income parents aren't always going to be working your standard 9-5 job or they work more than one job, or they simply focus on other activities. A lot of the lower income parents are pretty young and still very wrapped up in themselves and their own social lives.

Outreach and engagement is extremely important unless your desire is to alienate families. And while many lower income parents are young they do care about their children. I've worked with enough to know. You just have to find the right way to engage them.

Meh. I would argue that this is exactly what the first few responses were arguing for, and that others (including me) think doesn't do anything. Under the current system, you're seen as uppity trouble-makers if you don't engage in the existing parents. You get tons of push back for being too entitled, and ultimately nothing changes. So alternatively, let's say you engage this group. You either face a bunch of parents who want to help but are unable to (for a variety of reasons) or best case, who face a bunch of parents who want to help. I'll agree with PP that many of these parents "want" to help. But what's the point?

Go back to some discussion a few pages back: having bake sales and fundraisers and fixing up the library with a bunch of parents (low SES, high SES whatever) doesn't do crap to turn around a school. All it does is fix up the library, or earn a small bit of cash. That does not a better school make. Great schools can live without libraries. Lots of crappy schools have fantastic libraries. These activities are feel-good red herrings: you're "engaging the community"! we're supporting diversity!

Many of believe that the only way a school really changes to what we want is for the student body to fundamentally shift. As said earlier, that doesn't mean cutting out the existing student body. These schools have room for the new growth. So how to change the student body? Probably just try to motivate and create momentum among higher SES parents to get their kids to stay there. High SES parents don't really gives a hoot about libraries, and white boards and all that crap. Those are just signals that other high SES parents are vested in improving the school. High SES parents just want to make sure there are enough other high SES parents to create the momentum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is stating what exactly these Petworth schools are missing that would make them "great." Everyone is working under the presumption that these schools are lacking things that would make them great, but no one seems to know what that is. Middle-class children? Does that mean you want the low-income children displaced to other schools?

And the post about how low income family families feel embarrassed or uncomfortable is condescending and ignorant.

I'm the PP who wrote about my frustration with my long time in DC watching these issues play out. I don't necessarily agree with a few of the last posts, or at least think they are not articulated very well.

You said that no one is stating exactly what is missing from these schools. We are - we said they need the kids of high SES families. Every study in the world knows that that is the biggest correlation with school outcome (and improves the scores of the low SES kids to boot). You ask whether we want low-income children displaced. No - in fact, if you read my post, you'll see i mentioned that all of these crappy performing schools are under enrolled. Garrison (my IB school) was about to be closed. I suspect you could double the size of the school, fill it entirely with gentrifying richer families, and presto, the school now has the balance shifted to be a better performing school and continue to attract high SES families going forward.

It's not a perfect or pretty discussion. But there seems to be only two options: status quo; or let the marginally annoying and marginally offensive gentrifiers have their way and the school possibly improves. I'd rather the second.

Ok, so parents want more middle class kids. That still doesn't change the fact that this thread presumes that these schools are lacking things that middle class kids need/want. What are those things (aside from higher test scores)?

I just want more middle class kids. That's it. The other things come along with that: less classroom disruption; more kids at the same educational preparedness level; stronger PTA; less racial and SES tension directed at your kid.

I went to a gifted school for middle school. The facility was the dumpiest, oldest school in our town. The gym was from the 1940s and not regulation sizes. The library was just a few bookshelves in an old classroom. And there were as many portables as there were regular classrooms. The gym change rooms were an old classroom cut in half - half for girls, half for boys. Obviously back then we didn't have any electronic teaching tools. Probably a couple old tvs with vcrs, and we spent a lot of time watching film reels. I don't think there was a PTA. There was a soccer field but no other outdoor resources. No cafeteria, no vending machines. We all brown bagged every day and they pulled out loose benches in the gym for us to eat. We had smart kids who came from all over town, so the SES was fairly diverse (though, it being an upper middle class suburb, no one was "poor" like we see in DC). We had good teachers because it was a plum job - teaching kids who love learning. The school was amazing and had great results. Obviously an extreme example, but the point is that the only input was decent students. Everything else is unnecessary.

No What you want are all "talented & gifted kids" at your school not Middle Class because that is what you described. Your school wasn't a Middle Class school it was a TAG program that is why it was successful. You missed your own point. No different than a HS like TJ which has an out of date building but it doesn't matter because of the selection of students that attend the school. I'm sure you would prefer Middle Class "White Students" as well. White parents will not send their kids to non white majority school regardless of the Test Scores. PG county is a fine example of that, So is Benjamin B. HS in DC. Its a great HS with excellent Test Results what is 90 + percent black and no white parent even bothers to look at that school. there will look at Wilson maybe SWW or just go private...why? Tag programs produced the best results regardless of race or income. Take the no. 2 & 3 highest performing elementary schools in the State of MD...their located in Prince Georges County. Glenarden Woods (70+ percent black) and Heather Hills (68%) black...their students test results are damn near at 100 percent and have been for YEARS

To quibble - TJHSST is now majority Asian, and white parents still fight to get their kids there.

Now if you think the issue is that whites treat Asians differently from blacks, that is true. But I believe Wilson is also majority non-white, and yet whites want to send their kids there. Their problem is not with whites being a minority, but with whites being a very small minority. You may not consider that a reasonable concern, but let us not misstate what the concern is.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think many people have mentioned teachers at all in this discussion.

+1 I'm PP who posted that anyone wanting to help should go to the admin and teachers first to see what help they wanted or needed, because IME people who don't do that end up wasting time and money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is stating what exactly these Petworth schools are missing that would make them "great." Everyone is working under the presumption that these schools are lacking things that would make them great, but no one seems to know what that is. Middle-class children? Does that mean you want the low-income children displaced to other schools?

And the post about how low income family families feel embarrassed or uncomfortable is condescending and ignorant.

I'm the PP who wrote about my frustration with my long time in DC watching these issues play out. I don't necessarily agree with a few of the last posts, or at least think they are not articulated very well.

You said that no one is stating exactly what is missing from these schools. We are - we said they need the kids of high SES families. Every study in the world knows that that is the biggest correlation with school outcome (and improves the scores of the low SES kids to boot). You ask whether we want low-income children displaced. No - in fact, if you read my post, you'll see i mentioned that all of these crappy performing schools are under enrolled. Garrison (my IB school) was about to be closed. I suspect you could double the size of the school, fill it entirely with gentrifying richer families, and presto, the school now has the balance shifted to be a better performing school and continue to attract high SES families going forward.

It's not a perfect or pretty discussion. But there seems to be only two options: status quo; or let the marginally annoying and marginally offensive gentrifiers have their way and the school possibly improves. I'd rather the second.

Ok, so parents want more middle class kids. That still doesn't change the fact that this thread presumes that these schools are lacking things that middle class kids need/want. What are those things (aside from higher test scores)?

I just want more middle class kids. That's it. The other things come along with that: less classroom disruption; more kids at the same educational preparedness level; stronger PTA; less racial and SES tension directed at your kid.

I went to a gifted school for middle school. The facility was the dumpiest, oldest school in our town. The gym was from the 1940s and not regulation sizes. The library was just a few bookshelves in an old classroom. And there were as many portables as there were regular classrooms. The gym change rooms were an old classroom cut in half - half for girls, half for boys. Obviously back then we didn't have any electronic teaching tools. Probably a couple old tvs with vcrs, and we spent a lot of time watching film reels. I don't think there was a PTA. There was a soccer field but no other outdoor resources. No cafeteria, no vending machines. We all brown bagged every day and they pulled out loose benches in the gym for us to eat. We had smart kids who came from all over town, so the SES was fairly diverse (though, it being an upper middle class suburb, no one was "poor" like we see in DC). We had good teachers because it was a plum job - teaching kids who love learning. The school was amazing and had great results. Obviously an extreme example, but the point is that the only input was decent students. Everything else is unnecessary.

No What you want are all "talented & gifted kids" at your school not Middle Class because that is what you described. Your school wasn't a Middle Class school it was a TAG program that is why it was successful. You missed your own point. No different than a HS like TJ which has an out of date building but it doesn't matter because of the selection of students that attend the school. I'm sure you would prefer Middle Class "White Students" as well. White parents will not send their kids to non white majority school regardless of the Test Scores. PG county is a fine example of that, So is Benjamin B. HS in DC. Its a great HS with excellent Test Results what is 90 + percent black and no white parent even bothers to look at that school. there will look at Wilson maybe SWW or just go private...why? Tag programs produced the best results regardless of race or income. Take the no. 2 & 3 highest performing elementary schools in the State of MD...their located in Prince Georges County. Glenarden Woods (70+ percent black) and Heather Hills (68%) black...their students test results are damn near at 100 percent and have been for YEARS

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can I just throw in there, that non High SES parents can be involved and provide resources as well. The original question, as pointed out was very off-putting. Yes, you can make a significant impact on the school by bringing in resources, but the school won't change if you come in and act as if you are better able to help than those with less disposable income. Middle class and lower income parents may also have time to contribute and will surely have useful talents. It becomes a matter of outreach and engagement, which will have to be your first step if you really want to make a difference.

Nah, neither actually equate to any real results.

Many parents are very aware of the school and needs but simply can't be engaged for various reasons. Lower income parents aren't always going to be working your standard 9-5 job or they work more than one job, or they simply focus on other activities. A lot of the lower income parents are pretty young and still very wrapped up in themselves and their own social lives.

Outreach and engagement is extremely important unless your desire is to alienate families. And while many lower income parents are young they do care about their children. I've worked with enough to know. You just have to find the right way to engage them.

Anonymous wrote:^ One thing that is unusual in DC is that given its nature of being home to so much policy, research and analysis, there are more PhD's per capita in DC than there are in just about any other city in the US. And, a significant percentage of them are white. And, quite likely, in those highly-educated households, education is heavily emphasized and reinforced at home. As such, it would stand to reason that many of the white kids in DC who come from those households would score quite highly. As opposed to a white blue collar community in coal mining country, where the white kids aren't anywhere near as likely to come up with similar high scores. There are a lot of factors involved.

I don't think this is true. It used to be, anyhow, that the place with the largest number of PhDs per capita in the U.S. was Los Alamos, followed by Bethesda.There are far more PhD requiring jobs at the NIH, NCI, Army Research Labs, Naval testing site, 270 biotech corridor firms than in all the DC think tanks and most of the people in those MD based PhD requiring jobs live in Montgomery County, not the District. And a much greater proportion of them than you seem to think are not white.

In general, this perseverative need to conflate race and the appeal of a school and educational attainment is goofy.

Although we all have our biases and in regards to the comparisons of educational performance of affluent kids in the DC area vs. elsewhere, I agree education outstrips income here by a lot and I don't find it remarkable that the kid of an NIH scientists and UMD professor would have much higher test scores than those of a much wealthier stock brokers kid in the NYC suburbs.

[quote=Anonymous]I don't think many people have mentioned teachers at all in this discussion. [/quote]

It's mostly not about the teacher as long as s/he is decent.

Love how all these parents are saying you want control over teachers. Yeah,because that's why I worked my ass off and went 50K in debt, so that people who wouldn't last ten minutes in my classroom could judge my hard earned skills.

Unless you have actually worked in. Classroom, long term, with challenging children, you have no idea what you are talking about.

I don't think many people have mentioned teachers at all in this discussion.

+1
50K of debt for hard-earned skills that don't include non-paranoid non-self-centered reading comprehension.

I don't think many people have mentioned teachers at all in this discussion.

Love how all these parents are saying you want control over teachers. Yeah,because that's why I worked my ass off and went 50K in debt, so that people who wouldn't last ten minutes in my classroom could judge my hard earned skills.

Unless you have actually worked in. Classroom, long term, with challenging children, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I like Petworth as much as I like the next all-rowhouse, between the wars DC neighborhood. But it's no more proximate to the White House than Cleveland Park or Tenleytown

If you're a bike commuter it's a hellova better commute downtown from Petworth... Ever tried biking down Connecticut Ave?

Perhaps, but it is the opposite if you commute by metro. The red line is much more convenient.

*when the red line is not having some type of awful incident.

Petworth wins for metro-based commute, because you have both Yellow AND Green trains running. And those lines have many may fewer breakdowns than Red. If I had a nickel for every time I saw a post on PoP about some terrible red line delay/packed platform, etc...

Not if your downtown job is on the west-to-middle side of downtown. That was my (original PP) point. Yes it takes a Cleveland Park resident longer to get to a job at the Labor Dept. than it might take a Petworth resident. But, it takes a Petworth resident longer to get to my job at GW Hospital, or my DH's firm @ Conn. Ave & K, than it takes someone living in Cleveland Park/ AU Park

carry on