Anonymous wrote:https://georgetowner.com/articles/2020/10/15/school-without-walls-controversy-explodes/

"In a unanimous vote of no confidence in the leadership of DC Public Schools, the Dupont Circle advisory neighborhood commission on Oct. 14 strongly chastised “the way DC Public Schools Chancellor Lewis Ferebee and all other DCPS officials directly involved have handled the firing of Richard Trogisch, Principal of School Without Walls High School, the highest performing high school in the District since 2006.”

“Trogisch is the most revered principal in the DCPS system,” said Commissioner Mike Silverstein, former chairman of ANC 2B, who introduced the resolution. Yet on Oct. 7, less than 48 hours after Trogisch questioned whether the air quality and ventilation standards at School Without Walls would allow the school to open safely on Nov. 9 — as the mayor had announced on Oct. 5 — he was called into DCPS administration offices and fired. The pretext later given was that there had been a “student enrollment anomaly” in a previous year. "

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was interested in the Banneker question but crickets. No one on DCUM is willing to send their kid to Banneker I guess.

I guess you missed what I posted. Banneker's 0% IEP rate is equally concerning.

+1. Banneker has a lot of issues but somehow the focus is always on Walls. Not really sure why. Bannecker expels kids for the smallest thing. No extra support provided

That is how Banneker is designed. It is specifically meant to be a hard, incredibly rigorous school that promotes academic success but doesn’t accept excuses. Those who send their kids there know that up front and sign up for it - in fact those I know personally who sent their kids there see it as a benefit to the school, not a negative aspect. Not saying that is something I value (part of the reason none of my kids went to Banneker despite the fact two out of three of them likely would have gotten in), but that is why it doesn’t get the same critique.

As a parent of a Walls graduate, I also think part of it is the difference in the quality of education between Banneker and Walls. By any metric, and from those I know who graduated, Banneker is an excellent, academically challenging school that really showcases some of the best outcomes for students. Walls on the other hand is on the level of a higher end DCPS neighborhood school (I will use Wilson as my example as my younger two went/goes to Wilson) that has the ability to only admit students who already were succeeding and given other academic support, which makes the school look better then it really is.

While, in my experience, Walls’ English and history departments were consistently pretty solid (I would argue Wilson’s were also good, but more of a mixed bag in that while most teachers were reasonably good, there were some that were very poor which is why I’ll give this to Walls), the math, science, and foreign language departments were absolutely awful. I mean, I don’t think I’ve seen a school whose STEM or foreign language departments were as weak as Walls’ were (at the time). It felt like they solely brought in teachers who were near retirement and struggling to even teach any more. Wilson offered a far better math/science/foreign language education, and had far more options and opportunities for students.

Honestly, I think Walls should be disbanded. There might have been a time when it served a purpose, but right now what I took from my son’s time there was that we were sold on a scam idea that this was an academically acclaimed school that offered a level of education above that offered in neighborhood schools when, in reality, it felt like it only gained its accolades and success through being hyper-selective and targeting students who would have succeeded anywhere. And this is not just how I feel, I’ve had conversations with other ex-Walls parents that have similar beliefs. In fact, I think that it is telling that I know very few people who sent a second child to walls, most families I know sent their oldest to Walls but younger siblings went elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Might as well also submit a truth that really shouldn't be all that surprising (but it seems some of you would nevertheless be surprised by it): almost any "acclaimed" school, anywhere, is only acclaimed because a plurality of the students there would excel academically almost anywhere they went. The key to acclaim is attracting (or collecting) the best students.

Low-achieving schools are low-achieving because a plurality of the students there are low-achieving, and they would achieve similarly lowly almost anywhere they went.

Teachers really have very little to do with it.

The test for a really well-organized, professionally-talented school is whether it can take a plurality of low-achieving students and make them good or better after a few years. Neither Walls nor Wilson, imo, meets that test.

Oh my goodness, please don’t say that. Okay, I know everyone’s entitled to their opinion. And what you say may be true to an extent. But I think this really leads to complacency, and devalues the teaching profession...

....and I’ve got to say: this year, my DC attends one of these schools, and I see at least a couple of the teachers doing that on a daily basis. And I think a couple of the other teachers will at least making some headway. So it is possible.

(Yes, I know anecdote isn’t data, and you used the word plurality, etc etc etc etc. But it’s an amazingly beautiful thing to see when it happens.)

Anonymous wrote:Might as well also submit a truth that really shouldn't be all that surprising (but it seems some of you would nevertheless be surprised by it): almost any "acclaimed" school, anywhere, is only acclaimed because a plurality of the students there would excel academically almost anywhere they went. The key to acclaim is attracting (or collecting) the best students.

Low-achieving schools are low-achieving because a plurality of the students there are low-achieving, and they would achieve similarly lowly almost anywhere they went.

Teachers really have very little to do with it.

The test for a really well-organized, professionally-talented school is whether it can take a plurality of low-achieving students and make them good or better after a few years. Neither Walls nor Wilson, imo, meets that test.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this rumor mongering about the principal is ridiculous. If he has an actual whistleblower complaint, let him go public with it. Otherwise it's just adding fuel to the fire of people who don't want to go back to school until we solve gentrification and have universal vaccines and Medicare for all.

We may not hear about it until the D.C. government coughs up a big settlement or an arbitrator issues a decision. Trogisch is under no obligation to say squat, and we know from news reports that his attorney has already told him to STFU.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was interested in the Banneker question but crickets. No one on DCUM is willing to send their kid to Banneker I guess.

I guess you missed what I posted. Banneker's 0% IEP rate is equally concerning.

+1. Banneker has a lot of issues but somehow the focus is always on Walls. Not really sure why. Bannecker expels kids for the smallest thing. No extra support provided

That is how Banneker is designed. It is specifically meant to be a hard, incredibly rigorous school that promotes academic success but doesn’t accept excuses. Those who send their kids there know that up front and sign up for it - in fact those I know personally who sent their kids there see it as a benefit to the school, not a negative aspect. Not saying that is something I value (part of the reason none of my kids went to Banneker despite the fact two out of three of them likely would have gotten in), but that is why it doesn’t get the same critique.

As a parent of a Walls graduate, I also think part of it is the difference in the quality of education between Banneker and Walls. By any metric, and from those I know who graduated, Banneker is an excellent, academically challenging school that really showcases some of the best outcomes for students. Walls on the other hand is on the level of a higher end DCPS neighborhood school (I will use Wilson as my example as my younger two went/goes to Wilson) that has the ability to only admit students who already were succeeding and given other academic support, which makes the school look better then it really is.

While, in my experience, Walls’ English and history departments were consistently pretty solid (I would argue Wilson’s were also good, but more of a mixed bag in that while most teachers were reasonably good, there were some that were very poor which is why I’ll give this to Walls), the math, science, and foreign language departments were absolutely awful. I mean, I don’t think I’ve seen a school whose STEM or foreign language departments were as weak as Walls’ were (at the time). It felt like they solely brought in teachers who were near retirement and struggling to even teach any more. Wilson offered a far better math/science/foreign language education, and had far more options and opportunities for students.

Honestly, I think Walls should be disbanded. There might have been a time when it served a purpose, but right now what I took from my son’s time there was that we were sold on a scam idea that this was an academically acclaimed school that offered a level of education above that offered in neighborhood schools when, in reality, it felt like it only gained its accolades and success through being hyper-selective and targeting students who would have succeeded anywhere. And this is not just how I feel, I’ve had conversations with other ex-Walls parents that have similar beliefs. In fact, I think that it is telling that I know very few people who sent a second child to walls, most families I know sent their oldest to Walls but younger siblings went elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:All this rumor mongering about the principal is ridiculous. If he has an actual whistleblower complaint, let him go public with it. Otherwise it's just adding fuel to the fire of people who don't want to go back to school until we solve gentrification and have universal vaccines and Medicare for all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was interested in the Banneker question but crickets. No one on DCUM is willing to send their kid to Banneker I guess.

I guess you missed what I posted. Banneker's 0% IEP rate is equally concerning.

+1. Banneker has a lot of issues but somehow the focus is always on Walls. Not really sure why. Bannecker expels kids for the smallest thing. No extra support provided