Today's Post OpEd from DCPS consultants

[Anonymous]

The question is---does DCPS really believe the consultants' "vision" or is the Gray administration's real goal to eliminate higher SES HH participation in schools EOTP so that the vestiges of the Marion-Barry DCPS patronage system can continue to run the schools (and collect a paycheck) without those interfering and demanding high SES parents asking for competence and quality?

That's why WOTP would get a pass under this scenario---DCPS Central office long ago gave up battling the parents in those neighborhoods and granted those schools "autonomous status". The entrenched bureaucracy gets to continue (with all the self-dealing, "friends and families contracting and consulting contracts" that have characterized DCPS over the last 30 years) while cloaking itself in terms like "maximizing socioeconomic integration"---knowing full-well that the real result will be flight from the EOTP DCPS system by higher SES families. Forcing the "economic integration" policies onto the charter school system would weaken the attractiveness charter schools---which have been the other thorn in the side of the DCPS bureaucracy. Maybe the consultants should take off their rose-colored glasses and start looking at the underlying motivations of the people who hired them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I dislike the implication in the article that there was something wrong or unfair in parents organizing to improve their neighborhood school and encourage each other to send their kids there (presumably they are talking about Brent?)
Just rubs me the wrong way not to recognize the virtue of this kind of civic engagement.

+1

[Anonymous]

I think 50% mandatory low-SES/FARMs is too high for SES families... many high-SES families will bail DC schools.

I think a goal of 30% low-SES in each grade may keep high-SES families.

It does seem like the consultants have not spoken with any high-SES DC parents to see if their theories would fly.

The are operating in a vaccum. So silly.

[Anonymous]

They also need to address GT programs and advanced learners - they most certainly would not allow pull-out or tracking. So, how will they accommodate high-SES .... or is it only about accommodating low-SES?

[Anonymous]

I agree. Would like to see where the 50% figure comes from.

Also. Here is the rub. The authors seem happy for many schools in DC to remain almost entirely full of poor and minority kids. They are not fighting those schools. They are fighting against schools that have become more than 50% middle class.

Truth is, the minority parents who historically have rejected their neighborhood schools and placed their kids Into OOB schools are the more functional and ambitious families who would actually improve their neighborhood schools if they didn't have the OOB. But that would be a tougher argument to make than limiting white middle class access to their inboundary school

[Anonymous]

Wrong link to Henderson twitter page. Try that again

https://mobile.twitter.com/HendersonKaya

[Anonymous]

It is only about accommodating low-SES---that has always been the stated motivation of DC government politicians---but the reality has been that government money doesn't make it to the low-SES schools and children---instead it has been funneled to the pockets of the DC political establishment (see., e.g., former councilmember Harry Thomas---serving time for siphoning money intended for DC low income children's causes into "non-profits" owned and controlled by his family and associates).

So that's why there is not (nor will there ever be) an emphasis by the current DC political establishment on accommodating the needs of high SES learners. The bleeding heart white liberals like Graham, Mendelsohn and Wells buy into all the BS and are deathly afraid of being labelled as "racist" if they advocate for more programs for more advanced prepared learners, while the Marion Barry/Harry Thomas old guard wants to protect the money train for the DC bureaucratic political elite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So what I gathered from this article is that DCPS has decided...

You do realize that none of these people work for DCPS? Petrilli wrote a book about diverse schools, so that's very much where he is coming from.

http://www.amazon.com/Diverse-Schools-Dilemma-Parents-Socioeconomically-ebook/dp/B009F32Z2E/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390756111&sr=8-1&keywords=michael+petrilli

This is an opinion article by interested parties who have a good deal of knowledge and experience about these issues. They are trying to influence the process, yes. But they are, as far as I can tell, not in any way an official part of any of the organizations that will be deciding this. Trust me, DCPS, DME, OSSE, etc will be very careful about not putting any final decisions out until after the primary, and probably after the general election in November. There is no way they are going to make any contentious decisions right before the election.

[Anonymous]

How would this proposed plan affect schools like Oyster, who have both IB and OOB currently?

[Anonymous]

Interesting since Michael petrelli wrote that he chose to move to bethesda to avoid diverse schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I fully support requiring charters like Mundo Verde and Yu Ying to have at least 50% FARMS.

You can't mandate a FARMS percentage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I dislike the implication in the article that there was something wrong or unfair in parents organizing to improve their neighborhood school and encourage each other to send their kids there (presumably they are talking about Brent?)
Just rubs me the wrong way not to recognize the virtue of this kind of civic engagement.

Jerking supportive and involved parents around with the kind of scheme being proposed in the article is a good way to alienate them and get them disinvested from the system. Bad idea.

[Anonymous]

The idea is to give FARMS status weight in the lottery with 50% as a goal.

[Anonymous]

Curious how this worked out in other districts with Washingtons demographics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The question is---does DCPS really believe the consultants' "vision" or is the Gray administration's real goal to eliminate higher SES HH participation in schools EOTP so that the vestiges of the Marion-Barry DCPS patronage system can continue to run the schools (and collect a paycheck) without those interfering and demanding high SES parents asking for competence and quality?

That's why WOTP would get a pass under this scenario---DCPS Central office long ago gave up battling the parents in those neighborhoods and granted those schools "autonomous status". The entrenched bureaucracy gets to continue (with all the self-dealing, "friends and families contracting and consulting contracts" that have characterized DCPS over the last 30 years) while cloaking itself in terms like "maximizing socioeconomic integration"---knowing full-well that the real result will be flight from the EOTP DCPS system by higher SES families. Forcing the "economic integration" policies onto the charter school system would weaken the attractiveness charter schools---which have been the other thorn in the side of the DCPS bureaucracy. Maybe the consultants should take off their rose-colored glasses and start looking at the underlying motivations of the people who hired them.

+1