Walls is do far from its original mission - experiential education - it is ridiculous.

Honestly I think it should be merged with another school (Banneker?) under joint management (keep the bldg) or just reconstituted entirely.

What is the point of a selective “humanities” school that offers no post-AP humanities classes? Does every course have students leave the bldg every week and use the city as their name reflects?

Why don’t people demand more?

Anonymous wrote:I have a 9th grader at Walls and I'm not happy with the school, but she is. She likes the motivated cohort of students and the vibrant discussions in class.

90% of the teachers she has are sub-par. Completely wacky, or else phoning it in. No Geometry teacher for most of the first quarter and then pulled in a teacher who is brand new to the profession and doing ok, but certainly not stellar teaching.

I like the 9th grade guidance counselor. She is responsive and professional, but the rest of the administration is iffy.

The classes are unispiring--a slog through AP World History, Biology and Geometry. Not sure what the humanities class is supposed to be, but I don't see any kind of in depth reading of literature or instruction in writing.

There is nothing special about this school at all, except that the students are selected for their academic abilities. Otherwise, just four years of preparing kids to apply to college, no heart or greater mission detectable.

I could have written this exactly. With a 10th grader. The place is a mess. They compliment the kids for “demanding their education” because the adults in the building ( except for the grade counselors and a few deans ) that the students need to keep an eye on every little thing. Grades entered late, incorrectly, not at all. Teachers leave in the middle of the year and students need to teach themselves. There is nothing special about this school except the cohort of kids.

I can't speak to SWW inside that building. But as a GW professor, I've had a few of the Walls kids in my courses through the Associate's degree program in the partnership between GW and SWW; those kids are super smart, segue right in with the college kids, and get access to college classes in that program.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on the latest (2017) OSSE Equity Reports, Walls should be SO much better considering it takes only kids who pass a rigorous test. It has less than 1 percent special education students or English language learners. It is 42% white. It has 22% FARMS.
DCI, on the other hand, has to take anyone who applies from the feeders and lottery. It has 16% special education and 10 percent ELL. It is 15% white and has over 50% FARMS. It offers every kid a foreign language path and is IB for ALL.

What on earth does DCI have to do with this thread or the OPs question?

+1. This seems irrelevant. But if you're comparing Walls to DCI then Walls is getting much better results per test scores.

Anonymous wrote:Parent of recent SWW graduate and agree with 20:54. I also have a kid at Wilson. Academically, I don't see much difference. Teachers are luck of the draw, and my DC has had very good teachers at Wilson. YMMV. We had some pretty awful ones at SWW. I think the culture is different, so it really depends on what your DC prefers. Overall, we've been more pleased with Wilson.

+1. This has been our experience with kids at both schools. I would pick Wilson. The teachers have been MUCH better- no comparison over 4 years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone provide thoughts about School Without Walls, particularly parents with students currently there?

We attended the orientation. Several of the teachers seemed under-enthused and a few seemed downright cranky. However, I have heard many positive things about the school, especially the rigorous academics and opportunity to use GW and other resources. Clearly, attending an application-only school results in a highly-motivated cohort, but I am wondering if there are other benefits? I am interested in any insider knowledge, either positive or negative, that will help our child make a decision about whether to attend the school.

Highly motivated cohort and relatively small class size;
Good selection of AP courses (but fewer than Wilson);
The top 10-20% of graduates at SWW will do very well in college placements. Don't expect personalized college admission counseling; there will be one counselor for the entire grade of 120 or so students.

This makes me feel like Wilson might be a better fit for DC and not even bother with SWW.

Anonymous wrote:Based on the latest (2017) OSSE Equity Reports, Walls should be SO much better considering it takes only kids who pass a rigorous test. It has less than 1 percent special education students or English language learners. It is 42% white. It has 22% FARMS.
DCI, on the other hand, has to take anyone who applies from the feeders and lottery. It has 16% special education and 10 percent ELL. It is 15% white and has over 50% FARMS. It offers every kid a foreign language path and is IB for ALL.

What on earth does DCI have to do with this thread or the OPs question?

Based on the latest (2017) OSSE Equity Reports, Walls should be SO much better considering it takes only kids who pass a rigorous test. It has less than 1 percent special education students or English language learners. It is 42% white. It has 22% FARMS.
DCI, on the other hand, has to take anyone who applies from the feeders and lottery. It has 16% special education and 10 percent ELL. It is 15% white and has over 50% FARMS. It offers every kid a foreign language path and is IB for ALL.

There are a lot of comments about uninspiring teachers. Are there any particularly strong departments or good electives? Are 11th and 12th grade teachers better than 9th since several comments say 9th is weak?

Anonymous wrote:I’m not finding this commentary very comforting. My DC is excited about Walls and the possibility of going there. He can also go to Wilson, beginning to wonder if we should think about that more seriously.

What appealed to your kid about Walls in the first place? Press him on what he is looking for.

If he gets in, have him shadow and decide if the reality meets his expectations. But otherwise I’d let him decide.

I’m not finding this commentary very comforting. My DC is excited about Walls and the possibility of going there. He can also go to Wilson, beginning to wonder if we should think about that more seriously.

Anonymous wrote:I have a 9th grader at Walls and I'm not happy with the school, but she is. She likes the motivated cohort of students and the vibrant discussions in class.

90% of the teachers she has are sub-par. Completely wacky, or else phoning it in. No Geometry teacher for most of the first quarter and then pulled in a teacher who is brand new to the profession and doing ok, but certainly not stellar teaching.

I like the 9th grade guidance counselor. She is responsive and professional, but the rest of the administration is iffy.

The classes are unispiring--a slog through AP World History, Biology and Geometry. Not sure what the humanities class is supposed to be, but I don't see any kind of in depth reading of literature or instruction in writing.

There is nothing special about this school at all, except that the students are selected for their academic abilities. Otherwise, just four years of preparing kids to apply to college, no heart or greater mission detectable.

Parent of a recent Walls graduate-- I agree with this assessment. Kids are the best part of the Walls experience. Teachers are a mixed bag. DC had a good time and enjoyed it. I found it uninspiring.

11:56. Thank you for the thorough response.

At the university level, literature and creative writing are considered part of the humanities. (http://shc.stanford.edu/what-are-the-humanities)

What is SWW take on what is, and isn't, 'humanities?'

My DC is a recent graduate and had a similar experience in 9th grade to the one being expressed by others. And don't think for a second that there are not some kids at SWW that disrupt the class. In the 9th grade bio class the teacher had no control over any of them. It was so bad the Asst Vice Principal had to come talk to the class. Learned very little. In 10th, he would have had the same experience with the schedule he had with teachers but luckily he investigated the schedule of others and changed one class that made the rest of the schedule switch to the better teachers. Things improved in 11th and 12th but some of the problems remained with uninspiring teachers.

Resolving issues at the school is just hard, but I expect that may true at almost any high school.

Overall I think my DC felt like there was a lot of busy work and unnecessary group projects and while he learned some, it wasn't an intellectual leap. He played sports and participated in clubs. Had a good college outcome and we felt the counselor was an ivy but I don't think i can credit SWW entirely for that success. He did outside courses at CTY in physics and chemistry -- and those courses were hard bc SWW had not prepared him well. He also took two GW courses in programming.

The school does have cliques. Drugs are easy to get like at any high school.

Would he do it again? Maybe. The alternative for him would have been Wilson which also has its pluses and minuses like SWW. There are tradeoffs between a large public and a smaller public -- SWW is humanities based whereas Wilson has true literature courses and creative writing courses. Wilson has technology/programming/finance courses whereas SWW does not. Wilson is more sports oriented than SWW but SWW sports do pretty well even if inconvenient for practice. I think SWW kids have more independence opportunities including that it is easy to take GW courses if the student wants to pursue it. Both schools have competitive students and it is pretty cutthroat at the top.