Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'd move on, PP, since it's just not going to get better the higher up you go. The low SES kids just have too many needs. DCPS teachers come under little pressure to differentiate effectively. As long as your kid is on track to pass the PARCC with a 4 in 3rd grade, he or she isn't worth pushing in this system of modest ambitions.
You generally have to buy or rent in-boundary for a school that's majority high SES, or lottery into one, to ensure challenge after around 2nd grade. This explains why the overwhelming majority of high SES DC parents who stay in the public system past the early grades do this.
This is such a gross and untrue position. It’s not an accurate representation of our experience in a title 1 school. It paints the teachers, principal, and fellow students in such a bad light with so many false assumptions.
You don’t have to do anything like this. You’ll be a better person if you can overcome the biases of the PP.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm really feeling this now that DC is in 6th at a HRCS. DC is so bright, so capable of stepping up to the plate academically, yet his school is playing academic softball.
Example: DC is a voracious reader with a large vocabulary, yet the school is "teaching" vocab words he's used for years.
Sadly, I guess that's what I should expect from a school with so many kids with sub-4 PARCC scores and a mindset that says kids 2 years behind and 2 years ahead should be thrown together and taught the same lessons.
Have you discussed your concerns with the teacher to make sure there is adequate differentiation in place?
It's public school, for the general public, not sure what you expect but supplement and teach your child to learn and do things by themselves.
I posted previously here. Our DCPS did do exactly that. Why do you assume they won’t?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I had one child who was in one of the first cohorts of gentrifying kids in a school. What I noticed with that experience is that the teachers were not experienced in differentiating for this type of student- it was a new population and they had to figure out the best way to meet the needs of that population. It isn't just about the academics or advance students- they have usually seen those before. It was also about dealing with the DCUM type of parenting. Very involved, pushing for more differentiation, asking for constant updates, wanting to know how to supplement, etc. There were also more resources available (financial contributions, parent volunteers, contacts, etc.) and the teachers were not yet experienced with tapping into those resources.
Several years later, my second child went through the school. There was a night and day difference. Teachers knew from day one how to "teach" these kids, as well as how to talk/deal with their families.
If there are a couple of cohorts ahead of you that fit your child, then the teachers and school are probably adjusted to what your child needs and will be able to accommodate accordingly. If you child is in one of the first cohorts, it is more likely that the teachers are still figuring this out, and they may take some time to figure out how to best serve the new population.
Do you feel like your first child got a notably worse education for it? Or did it just require more work on your part?
You hit the nail on the head. It was more work on my part for the first. Figuring out the right questions to ask, supplementing (and realizing it wasn't necessary), not supplementing (and realizing we needed to), establishing a relationship with the school (without being the annoying parent), etc. With my second child, it was so much easier.. (although, to be fair, some of that could have just been because I was a more experienced parent).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I had one child who was in one of the first cohorts of gentrifying kids in a school. What I noticed with that experience is that the teachers were not experienced in differentiating for this type of student- it was a new population and they had to figure out the best way to meet the needs of that population. It isn't just about the academics or advance students- they have usually seen those before. It was also about dealing with the DCUM type of parenting. Very involved, pushing for more differentiation, asking for constant updates, wanting to know how to supplement, etc. There were also more resources available (financial contributions, parent volunteers, contacts, etc.) and the teachers were not yet experienced with tapping into those resources.
Several years later, my second child went through the school. There was a night and day difference. Teachers knew from day one how to "teach" these kids, as well as how to talk/deal with their families.
If there are a couple of cohorts ahead of you that fit your child, then the teachers and school are probably adjusted to what your child needs and will be able to accommodate accordingly. If you child is in one of the first cohorts, it is more likely that the teachers are still figuring this out, and they may take some time to figure out how to best serve the new population.
Do you feel like your first child got a notably worse education for it? Or did it just require more work on your part?
Anonymous wrote:I had one child who was in one of the first cohorts of gentrifying kids in a school. What I noticed with that experience is that the teachers were not experienced in differentiating for this type of student- it was a new population and they had to figure out the best way to meet the needs of that population. It isn't just about the academics or advance students- they have usually seen those before. It was also about dealing with the DCUM type of parenting. Very involved, pushing for more differentiation, asking for constant updates, wanting to know how to supplement, etc. There were also more resources available (financial contributions, parent volunteers, contacts, etc.) and the teachers were not yet experienced with tapping into those resources.
Several years later, my second child went through the school. There was a night and day difference. Teachers knew from day one how to "teach" these kids, as well as how to talk/deal with their families.
If there are a couple of cohorts ahead of you that fit your child, then the teachers and school are probably adjusted to what your child needs and will be able to accommodate accordingly. If you child is in one of the first cohorts, it is more likely that the teachers are still figuring this out, and they may take some time to figure out how to best serve the new population.
Anonymous wrote:I'd move on, PP, since it's just not going to get better the higher up you go. The low SES kids just have too many needs. DCPS teachers come under little pressure to differentiate effectively. As long as your kid is on track to pass the PARCC with a 4 in 3rd grade, he or she isn't worth pushing in this system of modest ambitions.
You generally have to buy or rent in-boundary for a school that's majority high SES, or lottery into one, to ensure challenge after around 2nd grade. This explains why the overwhelming majority of high SES DC parents who stay in the public system past the early grades do this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm really feeling this now that DC is in 6th at a HRCS. DC is so bright, so capable of stepping up to the plate academically, yet his school is playing academic softball.
Example: DC is a voracious reader with a large vocabulary, yet the school is "teaching" vocab words he's used for years.
Sadly, I guess that's what I should expect from a school with so many kids with sub-4 PARCC scores and a mindset that says kids 2 years behind and 2 years ahead should be thrown together and taught the same lessons.
Have you discussed your concerns with the teacher to make sure there is adequate differentiation in place?
It's public school, for the general public, not sure what you expect but supplement and teach your child to learn and do things by themselves.
Anonymous wrote:I'd move on, PP, since it's just not going to get better the higher up you go. The low SES kids just have too many needs. DCPS teachers come under little pressure to differentiate effectively. As long as your kid is on track to pass the PARCC with a 4 in 3rd grade, he or she isn't worth pushing in this system of modest ambitions.
You generally have to buy or rent in-boundary for a school that's majority high SES, or lottery into one, to ensure challenge after around 2nd grade. This explains why the overwhelming majority of high SES DC parents who stay in the public system past the early grades do this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm really feeling this now that DC is in 6th at a HRCS. DC is so bright, so capable of stepping up to the plate academically, yet his school is playing academic softball.
Example: DC is a voracious reader with a large vocabulary, yet the school is "teaching" vocab words he's used for years.
Sadly, I guess that's what I should expect from a school with so many kids with sub-4 PARCC scores and a mindset that says kids 2 years behind and 2 years ahead should be thrown together and taught the same lessons.
Have you discussed your concerns with the teacher to make sure there is adequate differentiation in place?
Anonymous wrote:I'm really feeling this now that DC is in 6th at a HRCS. DC is so bright, so capable of stepping up to the plate academically, yet his school is playing academic softball.
Example: DC is a voracious reader with a large vocabulary, yet the school is "teaching" vocab words he's used for years.
Sadly, I guess that's what I should expect from a school with so many kids with sub-4 PARCC scores and a mindset that says kids 2 years behind and 2 years ahead should be thrown together and taught the same lessons.