Anonymous wrote:PP, you sound like a reasonable person. I was referring to the tone of many, many posters in these here threads who are suggesting that if you send your children to any of the schools we mentioned - Deal, Walls, Wilson, Banneker, Ellington, Latin, etc. that our children will not be well prepared. That tone was just evident in the post made at 05:12, "One halfway decent charter HS, Latin, isn't much to brag about."
I could spend a day compiling the others. I don't even have children at any of these schools, but I find this attitude extremely negative, unhelpful and counterproductive. We need to stop pitting people against each and find ways to lift up all of our students.
Segregation is a huge reason that our schools are the way they are. Those parents who have the wherewithal to play the school game do. I get it. I am a parent too. Let's just put a moratorium on the trashing of schools that are in large measure effective, work to expand options for families and become a model for urban education.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You know there are lot of folks out there who feel we're doing our children a disservice if we send them to any school other than a private or BASIS. I mean we've already been told in some other threads that our children are doomed and will never be attractive to an Ivy, MIT or Stanford if we don't send them to Blair (or TJ). Basically, the consensus is that even Banneker and Walls are inferior. Wilson? Forgetaboutit.
It's a good thing we're all anonymous here or these fine upstanding citizens would call CFS on us for educational neglect.
That's a doozy - absolutely laugh-out-loud hilarious! Nobody thinks privates and BASIS have anything in common! Trust me, as a private school parent that's most ridiculous comparison that's been made on this thread so far!
Could you be more delusional? That's just precious!
![]()
Anonymous wrote:You know there are lot of folks out there who feel we're doing our children a disservice if we send them to any school other than a private or BASIS. I mean we've already been told in some other threads that our children are doomed and will never be attractive to an Ivy, MIT or Stanford if we don't send them to Blair (or TJ). Basically, the consensus is that even Banneker and Walls are inferior. Wilson? Forgetaboutit.
It's a good thing we're all anonymous here or these fine upstanding citizens would call CFS on us for educational neglect.
Anonymous wrote:You know there are lot of folks out there who feel we're doing our children a disservice if we send them to any school other than a private or BASIS. I mean we've already been told in some other threads that our children are doomed and will never be attractive to an Ivy, MIT or Stanford if we don't send them to Blair (or TJ). Basically, the consensus is that even Banneker and Walls are inferior. Wilson? Forgetaboutit.
It's a good thing we're all anonymous here or these fine upstanding citizens would call CFS on us for educational neglect.
The charter law, as written, doesn't serve bilingual families wellAnonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How is that so many people who presume to be so well-informed have no idea how charter law works?
There is NO preference for language ability, there is NO preference for academic ability. By law, charters cannot give preference to anyone other than founders or siblings.
Dear sanctimonious cretan. We've read the law, know exaclty how it works, know that the charter board debates these issues all the time, and think the current arrangement is sheer, unmitigated idiocy that the thoughtful taxpayer and voter can and should challenge. No preference for language ability is only the most obtuse aspect - we're Chinese speakers who left YY in 2010 because we were sick of the commute while our kid was the only bilingual kid in his entire grade. There is NO logic in DC embracing policy that helps it remain one of the several lowest-performing school districts in our great nation, including charter schools.