Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the testing point, we have kids who are very good test takers and we are among the "gentrifier" minority in our EOTP DCPS (though not just white). I think there is actually some benefit to diversifying the system to have our kids (who don't freak out about tests, because they rock them - I don't know, they're like Jeopardy fans too, so . . . yeah) take the PARCC, etc., because the systems judge the schools so strongly based on the test scores. It's a way to show "this school can produce great test takers/good students" too, so dive in, the water's warm.

You produced the good testtaker, not the school. When people analyze the data they will see that reflected. That's the fallacy of the whole thing. The achievement gap happens at home.
Schools should just focus on meeting the students they have each year with engagement, challenge and support and doing the best they have with the time they have. Is there SEL, inquiry based learning, opportunities for students to excel in different areas, support and feedback? Are students known? Support training and resources for teachers? Adequate and collegial planning? Good leadership? I would say Latin checks most of these wickets and that's why they are a popular school city-wide. Instead of trying to be something they're not, just replicate to offer more of the same kinds of seats.

As you say, this is exactly what Latin does. And I'm not sure test scores accurately reflect the impact a school can have on many different types of kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schools dont need to be all things to all people, esp charters. Latin is good at being a classics based program, close connected community and pretty high college placement across all demographics with lots of scholarships and grants. Personally I think its hokey for Latin to replicate in an underserved neighborhood, rather than a central location - but I imagine with more seats there will continue to be kids in low SES neighborhood for whom the description above could be of interest?

Uh, the very reason for charters in DC is to try innovative approaches to reach underserved children, and to improve outcomes.

Is it really true that Latin is good at it, if so many of its AA studentd are scoring well below grade level?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schools dont need to be all things to all people, esp charters. Latin is good at being a classics based program, close connected community and pretty high college placement across all demographics with lots of scholarships and grants. Personally I think its hokey for Latin to replicate in an underserved neighborhood, rather than a central location - but I imagine with more seats there will continue to be kids in low SES neighborhood for whom the description above could be of interest?

Uh, the very reason for charters in DC is to try innovative approaches to reach underserved children, and to improve outcomes.

Disagree. There were a lot of kids underserved by dcs one size fits all medicore programming before charters. Simply having a classics based curriculum is serving kids who weren't served before. Other charters offer language etc. And yes, some specifically focus on challenges that come soecifically with poverty in DC. And that's great. But I disagree that they all have to and that thats the entire point of charters. Where charters have worked well (like dc) is when they provide imaginative alternatives outside the lockstep public school void. If they didnt, parents wouldn't be clamoring for them.

Doesn't really matter what you think in this case.

The WL Board has said that one's of its strategic imperatives is to ensure it serves a diverse population -- not just racially but economically -- and that the current school no longer reflects the city. http://latinpcs.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/WashLatin_StrategicPlan_2016_LR-WEB-FINAL.pdf

From its most recent 5-year strategic plan, adopted in 2016:

DIVERSITY GOALS
? Increase student socio-economic diversity to better reflect that of the District.
? Sustain student racial diversity and continue to mirror racial demographics of D.C.
? Increase the diversity of the faculty and staff in both race and gender.
? Maintain an accomplished, skilled, and engaged set of community volunteers as the Board of Governors, who bring a range of expertise and reflect the diversity of the community"

The expansion plans are one way they are trying to achieve this goal.

Pardon the typos. Have to get out the door.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Schools dont need to be all things to all people, esp charters. Latin is good at being a classics based program, close connected community and pretty high college placement across all demographics with lots of scholarships and grants. Personally I think its hokey for Latin to replicate in an underserved neighborhood, rather than a central location - but I imagine with more seats there will continue to be kids in low SES neighborhood for whom the description above could be of interest?

Uh, the very reason for charters in DC is to try innovative approaches to reach underserved children, and to improve outcomes.

Disagree. There were a lot of kids underserved by dcs one size fits all medicore programming before charters. Simply having a classics based curriculum is serving kids who weren't served before. Other charters offer language etc. And yes, some specifically focus on challenges that come soecifically with poverty in DC. And that's great. But I disagree that they all have to and that thats the entire point of charters. Where charters have worked well (like dc) is when they provide imaginative alternatives outside the lockstep public school void. If they didnt, parents wouldn't be clamoring for them.

Anonymous wrote:On the testing point, we have kids who are very good test takers and we are among the "gentrifier" minority in our EOTP DCPS (though not just white). I think there is actually some benefit to diversifying the system to have our kids (who don't freak out about tests, because they rock them - I don't know, they're like Jeopardy fans too, so . . . yeah) take the PARCC, etc., because the systems judge the schools so strongly based on the test scores. It's a way to show "this school can produce great test takers/good students" too, so dive in, the water's warm.

You produced the good testtaker, not the school. When people analyze the data they will see that reflected. That's the fallacy of the whole thing. The achievement gap happens at home.
Schools should just focus on meeting the students they have each year with engagement, challenge and support and doing the best they have with the time they have. Is there SEL, inquiry based learning, opportunities for students to excel in different areas, support and feedback? Are students known? Support training and resources for teachers? Adequate and collegial planning? Good leadership? I would say Latin checks most of these wickets and that's why they are a popular school city-wide. Instead of trying to be something they're not, just replicate to offer more of the same kinds of seats.

Anonymous wrote:Schools dont need to be all things to all people, esp charters. Latin is good at being a classics based program, close connected community and pretty high college placement across all demographics with lots of scholarships and grants. Personally I think its hokey for Latin to replicate in an underserved neighborhood, rather than a central location - but I imagine with more seats there will continue to be kids in low SES neighborhood for whom the description above could be of interest?

Uh, the very reason for charters in DC is to try innovative approaches to reach underserved children, and to improve outcomes.

Schools dont need to be all things to all people, esp charters. Latin is good at being a classics based program, close connected community and pretty high college placement across all demographics with lots of scholarships and grants. Personally I think its hokey for Latin to replicate in an underserved neighborhood, rather than a central location - but I imagine with more seats there will continue to be kids in low SES neighborhood for whom the description above could be of interest?

Anonymous wrote:On the testing point, we have kids who are very good test takers and we are among the "gentrifier" minority in our EOTP DCPS (though not just white). I think there is actually some benefit to diversifying the system to have our kids (who don't freak out about tests, because they rock them - I don't know, they're like Jeopardy fans too, so . . . yeah) take the PARCC, etc., because the systems judge the schools so strongly based on the test scores. It's a way to show "this school can produce great test takers/good students" too, so dive in, the water's warm.

Go for it! Embrace and celebrate the PARCC to your hearts content.

We can't stand the PARCC, for rich and poor students alike.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New Poster. My tip is that if you're at your in-boundary school, ignore DCPS threats and opt out of the PARCC testing vs. encouraging teens to cooperate. We've quietly opted out every year from 3rd grade on up without much difficulty, or missing a whole day of school during testing periods. We take our kids out of school right before testing sessions and return them to school afterwards. During testing sessions, we learn what we like. Your IB kid simply needs an excellent attendance record to opt out without penalty.

Until 7th grade when you will need a PARCC score, or to pay for another standardized test (SSAT, ISEE, SAT, ACT) from your own funds, if you are interested in applying to a DCPS application high school.

So go with an alternative, completely worth it to avoid 10 hours taking a test that's so long and poorly designed that every single state--two dozen--who adopted it in 2010 has already dropped it, or folded it into a state assessment.

Only DC still uses the "pure" PARCC.

On the testing point, we have kids who are very good test takers and we are among the "gentrifier" minority in our EOTP DCPS (though not just white). I think there is actually some benefit to diversifying the system to have our kids (who don't freak out about tests, because they rock them - I don't know, they're like Jeopardy fans too, so . . . yeah) take the PARCC, etc., because the systems judge the schools so strongly based on the test scores. It's a way to show "this school can produce great test takers/good students" too, so dive in, the water's warm.

Anonymous wrote:New Poster. My tip is that if you're at your in-boundary school, ignore DCPS threats and opt out of the PARCC testing vs. encouraging teens to cooperate. We've quietly opted out every year from 3rd grade on up without much difficulty, or missing a whole day of school during testing periods. We take our kids out of school right before testing sessions and return them to school afterwards. During testing sessions, we learn what we like. Your IB kid simply needs an excellent attendance record to opt out without penalty.

Until 7th grade when you will need a PARCC score, or to pay for another standardized test (SSAT, ISEE, SAT, ACT) from your own funds, if you are interested in applying to a DCPS application high school.

New Poster. My tip is that if you're at your in-boundary school, ignore DCPS threats and opt out of the PARCC testing vs. encouraging teens to cooperate. We've quietly opted out every year from 3rd grade on up without much difficulty, or missing a whole day of school during testing periods. We take our kids out of school right before testing sessions and return them to school afterwards. During testing sessions, we learn what we like. Your IB kid simply needs an excellent attendance record to opt out without penalty.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you making all achievement judgment based on PARCC scores have clearly never watch teenagers take the PARCC. Schools have zero control over the effort put into the test by any kid in any grade. Ask your own kid(s) if you don't believe me. Mine is one of them.

True. Some students don't care and don't put forth any effort during tests and schoolwork. Where is the parent/family culpability in developing students to be academically motivated and receptive. No program/school/initiative can overcome generational apathy to a great extent.

Family culpability? My high achieving kid simply does not care about the PARCC score. The test is boring and drags out over days. It's a waste of 2 weeks of classroom learning. I'm not sure how a family is responsible for forcing a bright kid to give the PARCC their top effort. You have any tips, let me know.

DCPS shouldn't bother with the 10th grade PARCC. No need.

The Dept. of Ed allows DC and the states to the use the PSAT or SAT as their HS standardized test under ESSA. Most kids see the point (free test they were going to take anyway) so they're more motivated than w/PARCC.