Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not the PP, but my take on Jefferson...

Jefferson was a good school in the recent past largely due to a strong Principal who attracted/recruited strong students. The principal retired and the school's quality fell. Rhee asked Capitol Hill parents what they would like in a middle school. There was not a consensus opinion, but one request was for a stronger academic program at Jefferson. Rhee created Jefferson academy at the school in response to the ask, but it was less than the parents wanted, and it wasn't fully funded to make it successful. Jefferson has a new strong principal who has had some success with discipline and test scores, but still no/few middle class Capitol Hill kids attend Jefferson.

Much of what would be good for Unicorn Middle School would be good for Jefferson. The biggest necessary improvement would be more academic rigor. The school serves students with a wide range in academic preparedness, and offering a more demanding academic track for those who are able would help to attract more CH families. The physical campus for Jefferson is great, but the school is need of modernization.

Things related to Jefferson that may or may not be important factors for Unicorn Middle School, Stuart Hobson is nearby and attracts many of the potential students (to an inferior campus). An even bigger factor luring students away is Basis and to some degree Latin.

Thanks. Have the Jefferson folks had any discussion with Hardy parents or closely reviewed developments there? What you are facing is the classic "chicken and egg" dilemma that exists all over the city. It seems that Hardy has come closer than anyone to cracking the code on this. At a very high-level, as I understand things, this was basically an agreement among families to attend combined with an agreement with the principal to provide programming they desired.

I think part of the challenge is that there really aren't a lot of "Jefferson folks." They don't have an active PTA. The principal is pretty busy running the school and dealing with IB certification. There's some community involvement/support, but not a lot of folks at feeder schools who are really pushing for it to feel like a better option to middle class and/or white families. Amidon has a small PTA of mostly families with younger kids. There's enough work to do there without getting involved in the middle school too. Van Ness is similar--they're almost all parents of kids under age 5 and I think many are unsure what their plans will be for middle school. They are working on opening their school first (plus, when you read stuff like the GGE article and threads on this website, you might also get the feeling that some families in Navy Yard aren't very interested in their kids mingling with poor or black folks....). Tyler and Brent are totally disconnected from Jefferson geographically and ideologically. With Eliot-Hine having so many open seats, I think many of them are focusing there.

In contrast, many of the families currently at the school or hoping to go are understandably content with the school being a "hidden gem"--a place where mostly black, mostly low-income kids do pretty well. Jefferson is significantly better than Eliot-Hine on test scores, and is approaching Hardy on some metrics, especially for 8th graders (whose test scores are arguably the best reflection of what the school can do, while 6th grade scores are more influenced by elementary education) and if you compare apples-to-apples by comparing economically disadvantaged students at each school. Learndc has all this data. So not everyone agrees the school needs to be doing more to reach out and woo more families (especially families they fear might look down on them!).

One last point to note: the school is scheduled for substantial renovations starting Summer 2016. I don't trust DCPS on everything, but after seeing Dunbar, Cardozo, etc. I think they do a beautiful job on construction.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not the PP, but my take on Jefferson...

Jefferson was a good school in the recent past largely due to a strong Principal who attracted/recruited strong students. The principal retired and the school's quality fell. Rhee asked Capitol Hill parents what they would like in a middle school. There was not a consensus opinion, but one request was for a stronger academic program at Jefferson. Rhee created Jefferson academy at the school in response to the ask, but it was less than the parents wanted, and it wasn't fully funded to make it successful. Jefferson has a new strong principal who has had some success with discipline and test scores, but still no/few middle class Capitol Hill kids attend Jefferson.

Much of what would be good for Unicorn Middle School would be good for Jefferson. The biggest necessary improvement would be more academic rigor. The school serves students with a wide range in academic preparedness, and offering a more demanding academic track for those who are able would help to attract more CH families. The physical campus for Jefferson is great, but the school is need of modernization.

Things related to Jefferson that may or may not be important factors for Unicorn Middle School, Stuart Hobson is nearby and attracts many of the potential students (to an inferior campus). An even bigger factor luring students away is Basis and to some degree Latin.

Thanks. Have the Jefferson folks had any discussion with Hardy parents or closely reviewed developments there? What you are facing is the classic "chicken and egg" dilemma that exists all over the city. It seems that Hardy has come closer than anyone to cracking the code on this. At a very high-level, as I understand things, this was basically an agreement among families to attend combined with an agreement with the principal to provide programming they desired.

Actually, Jefferson has little in common with Hardy and it isn't a chicken and egg problem. Hardy has high performing feeder schools and sits in the middle of a quite wealthy inboundary area.

Jefferson has two large feeder schools ( Amidon Bowen and now Tyler ) that have an abysmal record of adequately educating their students. Lots of focus and initiative but they are years away from graduating a nice number of students who have a solid foundation and are working at grade level in math, reading and writing. Tyler recently had proficiency rates in the teens and Amidon maybe in the 30s? Meanwhile Jefferson Academy seems to be doing a nice job of taking its 6th graders who come in quite behind and getting them to do well on the DC cas. That's super and it's progress.

Unlike Hardy, Jefferson has multiple large housing projects in its feeder zone and pockets of serious poverty cheek and jowl with extreme wealth.

But what does it mean for the handful of students who would come through Brent and by and large are ready for advanced work and have no need for an excellent remedial program. A small-sized middle school can't do it all for budget and staffing reasons and even as far as setting a school culture. No one from DCPS has admitted to this clash of levels of academic preparedness that would occur at Jefferson let alone articulated clearly how they would handle it or even shown other successful programs with similar huge gaps in its incoming 6th grade ( with the large majority starting way behind. Like years behind ).

I appreciate Jeff trying to understand the situation and first things first. It is NOThInG like Hardy. Stuart Hobson would be a better analogy to Hardy

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not the PP, but my take on Jefferson...

Jefferson was a good school in the recent past largely due to a strong Principal who attracted/recruited strong students. The principal retired and the school's quality fell. Rhee asked Capitol Hill parents what they would like in a middle school. There was not a consensus opinion, but one request was for a stronger academic program at Jefferson. Rhee created Jefferson academy at the school in response to the ask, but it was less than the parents wanted, and it wasn't fully funded to make it successful. Jefferson has a new strong principal who has had some success with discipline and test scores, but still no/few middle class Capitol Hill kids attend Jefferson.

Much of what would be good for Unicorn Middle School would be good for Jefferson. The biggest necessary improvement would be more academic rigor. The school serves students with a wide range in academic preparedness, and offering a more demanding academic track for those who are able would help to attract more CH families. The physical campus for Jefferson is great, but the school is need of modernization.

Things related to Jefferson that may or may not be important factors for Unicorn Middle School, Stuart Hobson is nearby and attracts many of the potential students (to an inferior campus). An even bigger factor luring students away is Basis and to some degree Latin.

Thanks. Have the Jefferson folks had any discussion with Hardy parents or closely reviewed developments there? What you are facing is the classic "chicken and egg" dilemma that exists all over the city. It seems that Hardy has come closer than anyone to cracking the code on this. At a very high-level, as I understand things, this was basically an agreement among families to attend combined with an agreement with the principal to provide programming they desired.

I think part of the challenge is that there really aren't a lot of "Jefferson folks." They don't have an active PTA. The principal is pretty busy running the school and dealing with IB certification. There's some community involvement/support, but not a lot of folks at feeder schools who are really pushing for it to feel like a better option to middle class and/or white families. Amidon has a small PTA of mostly families with younger kids. There's enough work to do there without getting involved in the middle school too. Van Ness is similar--they're almost all parents of kids under age 5 and I think many are unsure what their plans will be for middle school. They are working on opening their school first (plus, when you read stuff like the GGE article and threads on this website, you might also get the feeling that some families in Navy Yard aren't very interested in their kids mingling with poor or black folks....). Tyler and Brent are totally disconnected from Jefferson geographically and ideologically. With Eliot-Hine having so many open seats, I think many of them are focusing there.

In contrast, many of the families currently at the school or hoping to go are understandably content with the school being a "hidden gem"--a place where mostly black, mostly low-income kids do pretty well. Jefferson is significantly better than Eliot-Hine on test scores, and is approaching Hardy on some metrics, especially for 8th graders (whose test scores are arguably the best reflection of what the school can do, while 6th grade scores are more influenced by elementary education) and if you compare apples-to-apples by comparing economically disadvantaged students at each school. Learndc has all this data. So not everyone agrees the school needs to be doing more to reach out and woo more families (especially families they fear might look down on them!).

One last point to note: the school is scheduled for substantial renovations starting Summer 2016. I don't trust DCPS on everything, but after seeing Dunbar, Cardozo, etc. I think they do a beautiful job on construction.

Anonymous wrote:
One last point to note: the school is scheduled for substantial renovations starting Summer 2016. I don't trust DCPS on everything, but after seeing Dunbar, Cardozo, etc. I think they do a beautiful job on construction.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not the PP, but my take on Jefferson...

Jefferson was a good school in the recent past largely due to a strong Principal who attracted/recruited strong students. The principal retired and the school's quality fell. Rhee asked Capitol Hill parents what they would like in a middle school. There was not a consensus opinion, but one request was for a stronger academic program at Jefferson. Rhee created Jefferson academy at the school in response to the ask, but it was less than the parents wanted, and it wasn't fully funded to make it successful. Jefferson has a new strong principal who has had some success with discipline and test scores, but still no/few middle class Capitol Hill kids attend Jefferson.

Much of what would be good for Unicorn Middle School would be good for Jefferson. The biggest necessary improvement would be more academic rigor. The school serves students with a wide range in academic preparedness, and offering a more demanding academic track for those who are able would help to attract more CH families. The physical campus for Jefferson is great, but the school is need of modernization.

Things related to Jefferson that may or may not be important factors for Unicorn Middle School, Stuart Hobson is nearby and attracts many of the potential students (to an inferior campus). An even bigger factor luring students away is Basis and to some degree Latin.

Thanks. Have the Jefferson folks had any discussion with Hardy parents or closely reviewed developments there? What you are facing is the classic "chicken and egg" dilemma that exists all over the city. It seems that Hardy has come closer than anyone to cracking the code on this. At a very high-level, as I understand things, this was basically an agreement among families to attend combined with an agreement with the principal to provide programming they desired.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is overcrowded. The boundary has to change. How do those fighting to undo the boundary changes want to address overcrowding?

I've been asking that question for months, and I've never seen any reasonable solution yet. The only ones I've seen that make even a bit of sense are (1) build even more middle and high schools in NWDC, and (2) go to a full citywide lottery to reallocate all students among all schools. Both of those are unworkable for several reasons IMHO, but it's telling that they're the "best" options anyone has offered.

The full citywide lottery concept has been tried elsewhere. Ask any parent of school age children in San Francisco (if they still live in the City): the citywide lottery wrecked the SF public schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deal is overcrowded. The boundary has to change. How do those fighting to undo the boundary changes want to address overcrowding?

I've been asking that question for months, and I've never seen any reasonable solution yet. The only ones I've seen that make even a bit of sense are (1) build even more middle and high schools in NWDC, and (2) go to a full citywide lottery to reallocate all students among all schools. Both of those are unworkable for several reasons IMHO, but it's telling that they're the "best" options anyone has offered.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not the PP, but my take on Jefferson...

Jefferson was a good school in the recent past largely due to a strong Principal who attracted/recruited strong students. The principal retired and the school's quality fell. Rhee asked Capitol Hill parents what they would like in a middle school. There was not a consensus opinion, but one request was for a stronger academic program at Jefferson. Rhee created Jefferson academy at the school in response to the ask, but it was less than the parents wanted, and it wasn't fully funded to make it successful. Jefferson has a new strong principal who has had some success with discipline and test scores, but still no/few middle class Capitol Hill kids attend Jefferson.

Much of what would be good for Unicorn Middle School would be good for Jefferson. The biggest necessary improvement would be more academic rigor. The school serves students with a wide range in academic preparedness, and offering a more demanding academic track for those who are able would help to attract more CH families. The physical campus for Jefferson is great, but the school is need of modernization.

Things related to Jefferson that may or may not be important factors for Unicorn Middle School, Stuart Hobson is nearby and attracts many of the potential students (to an inferior campus). An even bigger factor luring students away is Basis and to some degree Latin.

Thanks. Have the Jefferson folks had any discussion with Hardy parents or closely reviewed developments there? What you are facing is the classic "chicken and egg" dilemma that exists all over the city. It seems that Hardy has come closer than anyone to cracking the code on this. At a very high-level, as I understand things, this was basically an agreement among families to attend combined with an agreement with the principal to provide programming they desired.

Anonymous wrote:Deal is overcrowded. The boundary has to change. How do those fighting to undo the boundary changes want to address overcrowding?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hear quite a bit of talk about a coalition to improve our schools and am very interested in participating. I suggest that this is the time to focus on a city-wide effort led by families focused on improving school quality and creating tangible indicators for what successful schools would look like from the perspective of children and their families.

One of my disappointments about the DME process is how it has pitted parents against each other and has not mobilized families around improving the quality of schools overall or even in specific higher, lower or middle performing schools.

The "secret" of the successful DCPS and charter schools is that the administration, teachers, and parents work together for the good of the students. Henderson's statement that families can leave DCPS is unacceptable. It alienates parents who want to be engaged in the education of their children at all socio-economic levels and leaves the system even more vulnerable and likely to fail.

DC is full of strong-willed, policy interested and engaged people. I would like to see this talent and energy funneled into productive ways to make DC schools the very best for the children of our city.

But makes sense if her MO is to preside over the demise of DCPS, to qualify for a position in the Charter industry.

But perhaps she's just tone deaf -- not a good quality for a leader.

that would make her the second tone deaf chancellor in a row - and DC has had three "tone deaf" mayors in a row, I guess.

I think the problem goes deeper than that - I think the near feudal sense of entitlement that charecterizes DC politics makes it almost impossible for any poltiical leader to succeed. "I cannot be redistricted because we have ALWAYS been IB for school X" "IB kids are welcome at school Y, AS LONG AS they do not change its "unique culture". "We must build no new apartments, because I have a right to park easily on the street using an RPP that costs under $50 a year" " we cannot enforce parking laws on Sunday, because we never have, so its my right to park anywhere when going to church" These kinds of attitudes, and the deference paid them, render it very difficult to accomplish any kind of rational planning and policy. It tends to make DC dysfunctional. The district rebound has been as successful as it is, mostly because of its wonderfuil legacy layout, because its still the major concentration of employment in the region, and becauase of the paradigm shift to urbanism among the young. Not because of its political culture, which resists change.

I beleive that some other less well situated jurisdictions, with more functional political cultures, will benefit from this.

Anonymous wrote:
Not the PP, but my take on Jefferson...

Jefferson was a good school in the recent past largely due to a strong Principal who attracted/recruited strong students. The principal retired and the school's quality fell. Rhee asked Capitol Hill parents what they would like in a middle school. There was not a consensus opinion, but one request was for a stronger academic program at Jefferson. Rhee created Jefferson academy at the school in response to the ask, but it was less than the parents wanted, and it wasn't fully funded to make it successful. Jefferson has a new strong principal who has had some success with discipline and test scores, but still no/few middle class Capitol Hill kids attend Jefferson.

Much of what would be good for Unicorn Middle School would be good for Jefferson. The biggest necessary improvement would be more academic rigor. The school serves students with a wide range in academic preparedness, and offering a more demanding academic track for those who are able would help to attract more CH families. The physical campus for Jefferson is great, but the school is need of modernization.

Things related to Jefferson that may or may not be important factors for Unicorn Middle School, Stuart Hobson is nearby and attracts many of the potential students (to an inferior campus). An even bigger factor luring students away is Basis and to some degree Latin.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In many ways I feel that a new part of DC has been thrown into the DCPS that many of us have been dealing with for sometime. You think it's a new thing to have your schools drastically changed overnight. Meanwhile we have been dealing with it for some time under the guise of 'reform'.
And the argument of 'we are losing something good and it's not fair' only resonates with a small part of DC. Find a broader base for more support. Most of us had, have, and will continue to have crap options. Hell, I would take a unicorn middle school over Jefferson and day.

That's easy to do. Just act like Jefferson is a figment of your imagination. I appreciate your larger point and I would love to work in a broader coalition on a platform that addresses the needs of a larger number of folks. I don't know anything about the Jefferson situation, but if you provide background, it could help education me and others.