Anonymous wrote:We live in DC (Capitol Hill area) and are the parents of a 15 month old. We won't be able to enter the PK3 lottery until 2025, so this is still some time off for us, but the big question that I have been wondering about as we look at DC public schools and decide whether we should stay or move to the suburbs is this--

How much does it really matter what percentage of a school's students are at grade level for reading/math?

I ask because I noticed that even the better schools in DC have large percentages of students not at grade level. We are in-bound to Ludlow-Taylor which has maybe 40-60% at grade level. Nearby Maury seems to be at about 75% I might be off somewhat with the precise percentages but the point is that these are not the 90-95%+ figures at a number of schools in the suburbs.

I've taught, though only at the college level, and even then it was pretty difficult for me to manage dealing with a class that not had obviously bright students but also students who obviously lacked the foundation to be in college (and mixing them together wasn't good for anyone). I know primary/secondary education is not college. I know that tracking is bad for students who are then stuck in the lower tracks (and in my own experience attending a racially mixed school district in suburban NJ, the higher tracks were almost all white while the lower tracks were almost all minorities, which was also not good).

I've also seen various articles/studies saying that it doesn't really matter where one goes to college. Taking my home state of NJ, there was once a study showing that controlling for SAT scores, etc., folks who went to Rutgers earned just as much as those who went to Princeton. I wonder if the same is true for elementary schools through high schools generally (controlling for all factors that schools can't control such as socioeconomic factors, the parents' degree of education, etc., etc.).

Putting my question again--how much is it going to matter if my child goes to a school in DC where say 50% are at grade level vs. a school in the suburbs where 95% are at grade level?

I know socioeconomic factors is the big elephant in the room, and I should also mention that in addition to having our child having solid academics, we also want him to learn from a wide diversity of folks from all sorts of backgrounds (he is himself a mixed kid, and his mother is an immigrant).

Thanks for any thoughts/comments you can share!

Anonymous wrote:OP. My children are at L-T. They are well above grade level. Only the older one has had to do standardized testing, but they have never tested below 90% nationwide when such data were indicated, and are typically around 96-98%. They have many peers in the school and are not academically bored. Perhaps most importantly they have strong, stimulating friendships.

For Pre-K I wouldn't even give the matter a second thought, assuming you can get in. For elementary, in the earlier grades I've sometimes had questions whether they were going fast enough for them not to be bored. But just seeing the level that my kids are at right now, despite Covid, removed those questions for me entirely.

There might be a critical mass below which some opportunities are missing, but if so the current L-T student-group is not close to it. (Indeed, I would be more worried about L-T if your kid had learning needs, per the discussion in a different thread.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it matters for elementary but it will definitely matter for middle school and high school.

I think it would depend on your kid. My DD is above grade and she will get bored if she was not in a classroom with other above grade kids.

Boredom never hurt a kid. And if OP is on the Hill, all of the elementaries have a strong cohort of bright kids. And there is a lot of work in elementary that isn’t about memorizing facts that allows kids to perform at different levels. A lot of group projects as well. Like our 5th grade has a debate unit, a persuasive essay unit, lots of stuff that gives kids all the room they need. The only kid I know who truly needs more advancement is uniquely gifted and disengaged, not just “above grade level.”

Anonymous wrote:OP, the racial makeup of the classroom matters.

I care about academics so I always chose schools that had a high percentage of Asian-Americans. I did not care about ses.

Anonymous wrote:
For sure, middle school years are challenging. But so far we've made it work, and I have not regretted it. (But, you know, maybe I'll regret it in high school. Who knows.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it matters for elementary but it will definitely matter for middle school and high school.

That's my take. And for MS and HS, it's much easier to differentiate, so then you need to look at how the school does that, and whether there are enough on-level kids to allow that. But for ES, it matters less in the lower grades, and we've seen a lot more differentiation in upper ES (once they aren't teaching kids to read anymore). My take would be that LT is fine for ES now, and might be better in several years, so just keep an eye on things.

My experience is that it matters only for elementary and middle schools. In high school smart kids choose harder classes and kids ho are lagging behind ill choose easier classes. The differentiation happens naturally in high school and college.

Also do not depend on the school to provide rigor and a good foundation to your child. You need to enrich and educate at home as other high achievers do. so that they are not left behind in high school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it matters for elementary but it will definitely matter for middle school and high school.

That's my take. And for MS and HS, it's much easier to differentiate, so then you need to look at how the school does that, and whether there are enough on-level kids to allow that. But for ES, it matters less in the lower grades, and we've seen a lot more differentiation in upper ES (once they aren't teaching kids to read anymore). My take would be that LT is fine for ES now, and might be better in several years, so just keep an eye on things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The language of "at grade level" obfuscates the differences we're talking about in DCPS. By fifth grade, your normal-bright, not profoundly gifted kid could be reading at an eighth grade level in a class with kids who are reading at a second grade level. If you would hesitate to put an average 14 year old in a class where most of the kids are normal 8-10 year olds, even if the younger kids were well-behaved and emotionally mature, and you would be skeptical of a teacher or school system that assured you this was fine and everyone would get their needs met, you probably should hesitate here, too.

Your fifth grader reading above grade level does not mean she should be in a class with the 14 year olds, or conceptualized as one in your head. You're mixing apples and oranges to exaggerate differences.

Anonymous wrote:The language of "at grade level" obfuscates the differences we're talking about in DCPS. By fifth grade, your normal-bright, not profoundly gifted kid could be reading at an eighth grade level in a class with kids who are reading at a second grade level. If you would hesitate to put an average 14 year old in a class where most of the kids are normal 8-10 year olds, even if the younger kids were well-behaved and emotionally mature, and you would be skeptical of a teacher or school system that assured you this was fine and everyone would get their needs met, you probably should hesitate here, too.