Anonymous wrote:Passing the test is not a set score. The top 250 scores pass the test and are then interviewed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The story was a mess, but did say clearly that the top 15% that you mention were allowed to take the test. This is just lowering the bar for test taking, not entrance into the school overall. The underlying hope is that some of the poorer kids from those schools will be able to pass the test. Now I have no idea if the bar for passing the test is being lowered.

There is already a clear attention to 'race' in the enrollment of kids to the high school, but I have never seen the formula.

I agree the story was a mess. It also did not provide a credible explanation of why the policy change was being postponed for a year. Yes, I understand that apparently the change was not properly published on a website - but who was hurt by that? It seems no one, since the top 15% were informed by letter that they would be eligible to take the test. So, big deal if it wasn't on the website - all the people that it affected were notified.

Also, someone needs to explain to me what is so wrong about trying to increase diversity this way. It strikes me as similar to what Texas has done - offering UT admission to every high school valedictorian. That has successfully increased diversity at UT.

The story may have confused things a lot. Were the top 15 (is it a hard number of students or percentage of the class) allowed to sit for the exam? I read the story as that they were not this year but are going to allow that exception next year. The 4 or 5 on PARCC is clear on the website, it was stated at the open house, it was stated at High School Night at Deal so I assume at other middle schools as well and it is clear on the MySchoolDC application. I have no idea how this standard could have been a surprise. I talked with an admissions officer at the Walls open house and he told me about this exception (to allow the top students at every middle school to sit for the exam). I do not see a problem in letting more students sit for the exam. Also, the fact that students that do not be the threshold criteria is also not new, this apparently happened even when there was just a minimum GPA requirement.

The top 15 were not allowed to take this year's exam, unless they scored a 4 or 5 on PARCC. But they were TOLD earlier this year that there was a way around that -- that top 15 students would be able to sit for the exam. And then, it turned out, that the policy isn't going to be in place for another year, effectively meaning these students have lost their chance.

I do wonder if the top 15 policy only applies to DCPS, or would it also be allowed for charter school students. Since SWW is supposed to be open to all students I would think that it would.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The story was a mess, but did say clearly that the top 15% that you mention were allowed to take the test. This is just lowering the bar for test taking, not entrance into the school overall. The underlying hope is that some of the poorer kids from those schools will be able to pass the test. Now I have no idea if the bar for passing the test is being lowered.

There is already a clear attention to 'race' in the enrollment of kids to the high school, but I have never seen the formula.

I agree the story was a mess. It also did not provide a credible explanation of why the policy change was being postponed for a year. Yes, I understand that apparently the change was not properly published on a website - but who was hurt by that? It seems no one, since the top 15% were informed by letter that they would be eligible to take the test. So, big deal if it wasn't on the website - all the people that it affected were notified.

Also, someone needs to explain to me what is so wrong about trying to increase diversity this way. It strikes me as similar to what Texas has done - offering UT admission to every high school valedictorian. That has successfully increased diversity at UT.

The story may have confused things a lot. Were the top 15 (is it a hard number of students or percentage of the class) allowed to sit for the exam? I read the story as that they were not this year but are going to allow that exception next year. The 4 or 5 on PARCC is clear on the website, it was stated at the open house, it was stated at High School Night at Deal so I assume at other middle schools as well and it is clear on the MySchoolDC application. I have no idea how this standard could have been a surprise. I talked with an admissions officer at the Walls open house and he told me about this exception (to allow the top students at every middle school to sit for the exam). I do not see a problem in letting more students sit for the exam. Also, the fact that students that do not be the threshold criteria is also not new, this apparently happened even when there was just a minimum GPA requirement.

Anonymous wrote:

The story was a mess, but did say clearly that the top 15% that you mention were allowed to take the test. This is just lowering the bar for test taking, not entrance into the school overall. The underlying hope is that some of the poorer kids from those schools will be able to pass the test. Now I have no idea if the bar for passing the test is being lowered.

There is already a clear attention to 'race' in the enrollment of kids to the high school, but I have never seen the formula.

I agree the story was a mess. It also did not provide a credible explanation of why the policy change was being postponed for a year. Yes, I understand that apparently the change was not properly published on a website - but who was hurt by that? It seems no one, since the top 15% were informed by letter that they would be eligible to take the test. So, big deal if it wasn't on the website - all the people that it affected were notified.

Also, someone needs to explain to me what is so wrong about trying to increase diversity this way. It strikes me as similar to what Texas has done - offering UT admission to every high school valedictorian. That has successfully increased diversity at UT.

The story was a mess, but did say clearly that the top 15% that you mention were allowed to take the test. This is just lowering the bar for test taking, not entrance into the school overall. The underlying hope is that some of the poorer kids from those schools will be able to pass the test. Now I have no idea if the bar for passing the test is being lowered.

There is already a clear attention to 'race' in the enrollment of kids to the high school, but I have never seen the formula.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just read today’s Post article on Walls. This notion of admitting any student in the top 15 percent of failing middle schools - in the name of the gods of diversity and inclusion - is jist nuts. The problem for DCPS is that in some schools only 1 percent of students pass the national standardized exam. If you effectively create a quota of at risk students at Walls by waiving academic success criteria, then the result will be diversion of faculty and staff resources to bring underperforming students up to grade level, at the expense of the learning experience of the high performing students. Or the curriculum will be dumbed down. Why DCPS seems hell bent on destroying one of the few standout schools in the District is beyond me. I guess it’s philosophical — it somehow being better to provide ‘equitable and inclusive’ access to mediocrity instead of letting those who have worked hard to achieve reach their full potential.

The story was a mess, but did say clearly that the top 15% that you mention were allowed to take the test. This is just lowering the bar for test taking, not entrance into the school overall. The underlying hope is that some of the poorer kids from those schools will be able to pass the test. Now I have no idea if the bar for passing the test is being lowered.

There is already a clear attention to 'race' in the enrollment of kids to the high school, but I have never seen the formula.

Anonymous wrote:I just read today’s Post article on Walls. This notion of admitting any student in the top 15 percent of failing middle schools - in the name of the gods of diversity and inclusion - is jist nuts. The problem for DCPS is that in some schools only 1 percent of students pass the national standardized exam. If you effectively create a quota of at risk students at Walls by waiving academic success criteria, then the result will be diversion of faculty and staff resources to bring underperforming students up to grade level, at the expense of the learning experience of the high performing students. Or the curriculum will be dumbed down. Why DCPS seems hell bent on destroying one of the few standout schools in the District is beyond me. I guess it’s philosophical — it somehow being better to provide ‘equitable and inclusive’ access to mediocrity instead of letting those who have worked hard to achieve reach their full potential.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is SWW still good for a kid who is into Science and Math? Should we stay at Wilson?

Look at the course offerings at both. AP is the most advanced courses offered, but students at all DCPS high schools can pursue dual enrollment at a local college if your student can make the schedule work with the rest of their classes.

SWW offers these Math/Science AP courses: Physics C, Cal AB, Biology, Environmental Science.

Wilson offers these Math/Science AP courses: Biology, Chemistry, 2 AP Physics courses, Environmental Science, Calc AB, Calc BC

Anonymous wrote:Is SWW still good for a kid who is into Science and Math? Should we stay at Wilson?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC said it was hard. What about yours?

Same. DC also said there was not enough space to write 6 paragraphs.

The essay said specifically to write six paragraphs?

It apparently said, write an intro, 4 paragraphs on the subject and a closing. Per my DD there was much debate among her friends post test over texts about how many paragraphs that meant. My DD was there for 3 hours as were most of her friends. They are all strong students that I would expect to do well so it sounds like a harder test than previous ones.

Do they provide the students with their scores or just whether or not they made it to the interview rounds?

They don’t give grades. What was the theme? Six paragraphs are a lot!

This is normal, opening, closing and 3 body paragraphs

You are aware that 2 + 3 is not 6, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DC said it was hard. What about yours?

Same. DC also said there was not enough space to write 6 paragraphs.

The essay said specifically to write six paragraphs?

It apparently said, write an intro, 4 paragraphs on the subject and a closing. Per my DD there was much debate among her friends post test over texts about how many paragraphs that meant. My DD was there for 3 hours as were most of her friends. They are all strong students that I would expect to do well so it sounds like a harder test than previous ones.

Do they provide the students with their scores or just whether or not they made it to the interview rounds?

They don’t give grades. What was the theme? Six paragraphs are a lot!

This is normal, opening, closing and 3 body paragraphs

Anonymous wrote:Serious question - if your child has testing accommodations as a part of a 504, how is that integrated for SWW test?