Deciding whether to try for latin

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is DCPS has lots of faults. But it also has to educate every kid. And ultimately when you create a system where privileged people can opt out, you create a vacuum where the charters have no reason to improve because they have enough families who will opt in and can kick out the kids not performing, and you have DCPS which has little incentive to improve because wealthier parents either concentrate in one area or opt out.

So no one is really improving or being forced to excel, charter or public, because the system does not incentive it.

It sucks. It's also not unique and a real problem with the US education landscape as a whole.

DCPS has to educate every neighborhood kid that enrolls and it runs its own choice program - selective high schools, out of boundary etc. No one ever publishes the rates of the out of boundary kids at DCPS who get sent back to their home school for behavior, attendance, etc. These forced transfers also push students back to DCPS schools. It would be great if information was more transparent so that there could be real analysis of where students are disappearing from some schools and ending up at others, especially mid-year. The public information that is available is on re-enrollment rates. A look at Ward 7 and 8 DCPS high schools has re-enrollment rates somewhere in the low 70's on average. Nearly 30% of students of those schools are either ending up nowhere, at other DCPS choice schools or at charters. So our system needs to support all of the choices because our families are using all of the choices. It's not just the privileged who are opting out. There may be notable failures (or failures to thrive) in the charter sector but that's true in DCPS as well. The notable failures aren't the only story though. There are charters that are doing well and/or improving and the same is true for DCPS.

"Forced transfers" is education consultant speak for CONSEQUENCES. There's a vocal minority in DC that thinks consequences are bad/unfair/discriminatory. I think most parents think them necessary.

Do you like it as much when the expelled kids end up at your kid's school?

That's a false choice. I like consequences...full stop. Kids who fail should not be advanced just because some SJW whines about 18 years olds in 3rd grade classes.

What's your argument? There should be no consequences?

Schools like BASIS and Latin give F's to kids all the time. It's only DCPS that's squeamish about failing kids because low expectations are the water in which DCPS swims.

This is why I didn’t feel comfortable moving my kid from a strong charter to an application school. I know the other classmates are used to getting attendance As.

Banneker is definitely not handing out As

Walls is a little more lenient in my kid’s friends’ opinions, but we don’t have direct experience

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is DCPS has lots of faults. But it also has to educate every kid. And ultimately when you create a system where privileged people can opt out, you create a vacuum where the charters have no reason to improve because they have enough families who will opt in and can kick out the kids not performing, and you have DCPS which has little incentive to improve because wealthier parents either concentrate in one area or opt out.

So no one is really improving or being forced to excel, charter or public, because the system does not incentive it.

It sucks. It's also not unique and a real problem with the US education landscape as a whole.

DCPS has to educate every neighborhood kid that enrolls and it runs its own choice program - selective high schools, out of boundary etc. No one ever publishes the rates of the out of boundary kids at DCPS who get sent back to their home school for behavior, attendance, etc. These forced transfers also push students back to DCPS schools. It would be great if information was more transparent so that there could be real analysis of where students are disappearing from some schools and ending up at others, especially mid-year. The public information that is available is on re-enrollment rates. A look at Ward 7 and 8 DCPS high schools has re-enrollment rates somewhere in the low 70's on average. Nearly 30% of students of those schools are either ending up nowhere, at other DCPS choice schools or at charters. So our system needs to support all of the choices because our families are using all of the choices. It's not just the privileged who are opting out. There may be notable failures (or failures to thrive) in the charter sector but that's true in DCPS as well. The notable failures aren't the only story though. There are charters that are doing well and/or improving and the same is true for DCPS.

"Forced transfers" is education consultant speak for CONSEQUENCES. There's a vocal minority in DC that thinks consequences are bad/unfair/discriminatory. I think most parents think them necessary.

Do you like it as much when the expelled kids end up at your kid's school?

That's a false choice. I like consequences...full stop. Kids who fail should not be advanced just because some SJW whines about 18 years olds in 3rd grade classes.

What's your argument? There should be no consequences?

Schools like BASIS and Latin give F's to kids all the time. It's only DCPS that's squeamish about failing kids because low expectations are the water in which DCPS swims.

This is why I didn’t feel comfortable moving my kid from a strong charter to an application school. I know the other classmates are used to getting attendance As.

Banneker is definitely not handing out As

Walls is a little more lenient in my kid’s friends’ opinions, but we don’t have direct experience

Banneker is an IB school. I have absolute confidence that you’re right. I was talking about Walls. And I don’t think kids from middle school dcps are going to be as prepared as kids from a good charter. I think this total lack of preparedness is why Banneker isn’t doing as well as it could.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is DCPS has lots of faults. But it also has to educate every kid. And ultimately when you create a system where privileged people can opt out, you create a vacuum where the charters have no reason to improve because they have enough families who will opt in and can kick out the kids not performing, and you have DCPS which has little incentive to improve because wealthier parents either concentrate in one area or opt out.

So no one is really improving or being forced to excel, charter or public, because the system does not incentive it.

It sucks. It's also not unique and a real problem with the US education landscape as a whole.

DCPS has to educate every neighborhood kid that enrolls and it runs its own choice program - selective high schools, out of boundary etc. No one ever publishes the rates of the out of boundary kids at DCPS who get sent back to their home school for behavior, attendance, etc. These forced transfers also push students back to DCPS schools. It would be great if information was more transparent so that there could be real analysis of where students are disappearing from some schools and ending up at others, especially mid-year. The public information that is available is on re-enrollment rates. A look at Ward 7 and 8 DCPS high schools has re-enrollment rates somewhere in the low 70's on average. Nearly 30% of students of those schools are either ending up nowhere, at other DCPS choice schools or at charters. So our system needs to support all of the choices because our families are using all of the choices. It's not just the privileged who are opting out. There may be notable failures (or failures to thrive) in the charter sector but that's true in DCPS as well. The notable failures aren't the only story though. There are charters that are doing well and/or improving and the same is true for DCPS.

"Forced transfers" is education consultant speak for CONSEQUENCES. There's a vocal minority in DC that thinks consequences are bad/unfair/discriminatory. I think most parents think them necessary.

Do you like it as much when the expelled kids end up at your kid's school?

That's a false choice. I like consequences...full stop. Kids who fail should not be advanced just because some SJW whines about 18 years olds in 3rd grade classes.

What's your argument? There should be no consequences?

There should definitely be consequences, and services designed to improve the situation. But you need to see that passing them from one school to another isn't a real solution from a district-level perspective. It doesn't help anything. It might feel like a solution to you because a kid might leave your school, but you haven't considered that kids will also come into your school from this. Just saying to kick them out is not thinking through the policy problem.

People who argue that every school should fit every kid are part of how we ended up in this situation. Not every school is ideal for advanced learners. Not every school is ideal for kids with behavioral problems. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on the Arts. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on STEM.

Passing kids from a school that is ill equipped to handle needs to one that can is not a problem, it is part of the solution. We do it all the time. Application schools do it. BASIS does it it too. Nothing wrong with it. What is wrong is people arguing that high standards for behavior, comportment and achievement somehow discriminate.

Part of the disconnect on DCUM is how many posters live either in Ed Consultant-Pedagogy Naval Gazing Land and/or come to these discussions with an elementary school mindset. The world looks very different when school and learning gets real.

Before you go there, there is a chasm between "warehousing bad kids" all in one place and centralizing support systems for kids who need them so we aren't wasting resources. If a kid cannot meet societal norms then they need to go somewhere better equipped to help them overcome those deficits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was pro-DCPS all through elementary school and up until April of the month we did the middle school charter lottery, got a spot at BASIS, and had a candid conversation with a DCPS middle school teacher who told me straight-up to take the BASIS spot because her DCPS did not meet the needs of advanced students. she wanted to, but the structure of the curriculum, her inabiity to fail students, her principal all kept her from adding enrichment and appropriate instruction for advanced students.

She was really unequivocal and I made my decision immediately after that conversation. She also said getting a seat at BASIS is like getting a prep school education for free, which I think it true about Latin as well. I'm very, very glad we took the spot.

I'm sure I trash talked charters when my kids were young. But the middle school ecosystem in DC is very different than elementary. I recommend doing some research and allowing yourself some grace to change your mind.

Truly appreciate this candor. The trash talking charters and "down with charters" mentality has created an environment in DC where politicians feel comfortable openly under-resourcing charters. It's not a little bit of money - it's estimated at $1,800 per student and that's money that a charter school doesn't have to improve teacher salaries, increase benefits, offer more athletics and clubs or fix sub-par facilities. Ask your charter school principal what they could do with that much more per kid.

Not to mention, the charter school teachers are paid less than their DCPS counterparts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is DCPS has lots of faults. But it also has to educate every kid. And ultimately when you create a system where privileged people can opt out, you create a vacuum where the charters have no reason to improve because they have enough families who will opt in and can kick out the kids not performing, and you have DCPS which has little incentive to improve because wealthier parents either concentrate in one area or opt out.

So no one is really improving or being forced to excel, charter or public, because the system does not incentive it.

It sucks. It's also not unique and a real problem with the US education landscape as a whole.

DCPS has to educate every neighborhood kid that enrolls and it runs its own choice program - selective high schools, out of boundary etc. No one ever publishes the rates of the out of boundary kids at DCPS who get sent back to their home school for behavior, attendance, etc. These forced transfers also push students back to DCPS schools. It would be great if information was more transparent so that there could be real analysis of where students are disappearing from some schools and ending up at others, especially mid-year. The public information that is available is on re-enrollment rates. A look at Ward 7 and 8 DCPS high schools has re-enrollment rates somewhere in the low 70's on average. Nearly 30% of students of those schools are either ending up nowhere, at other DCPS choice schools or at charters. So our system needs to support all of the choices because our families are using all of the choices. It's not just the privileged who are opting out. There may be notable failures (or failures to thrive) in the charter sector but that's true in DCPS as well. The notable failures aren't the only story though. There are charters that are doing well and/or improving and the same is true for DCPS.

"Forced transfers" is education consultant speak for CONSEQUENCES. There's a vocal minority in DC that thinks consequences are bad/unfair/discriminatory. I think most parents think them necessary.

Do you like it as much when the expelled kids end up at your kid's school?

That's a false choice. I like consequences...full stop. Kids who fail should not be advanced just because some SJW whines about 18 years olds in 3rd grade classes.

What's your argument? There should be no consequences?

There should definitely be consequences, and services designed to improve the situation. But you need to see that passing them from one school to another isn't a real solution from a district-level perspective. It doesn't help anything. It might feel like a solution to you because a kid might leave your school, but you haven't considered that kids will also come into your school from this. Just saying to kick them out is not thinking through the policy problem.

People who argue that every school should fit every kid are part of how we ended up in this situation. Not every school is ideal for advanced learners. Not every school is ideal for kids with behavioral problems. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on the Arts. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on STEM.

Passing kids from a school that is ill equipped to handle needs to one that can is not a problem, it is part of the solution. We do it all the time. Application schools do it. BASIS does it it too. Nothing wrong with it. What is wrong is people arguing that high standards for behavior, comportment and achievement somehow discriminate.

Part of the disconnect on DCUM is how many posters live either in Ed Consultant-Pedagogy Naval Gazing Land and/or come to these discussions with an elementary school mindset. The world looks very different when school and learning gets real.

Before you go there, there is a chasm between "warehousing bad kids" all in one place and centralizing support systems for kids who need them so we aren't wasting resources. If a kid cannot meet societal norms then they need to go somewhere better equipped to help them overcome those deficits.

Yes to the last part but the school they're being transferred school isn't equipped to handle them, they just don't have a choice.

I firmly agree that there should be more intervention and supports but the system is not set up for that and instead of arguing to address it people flock to charters to entirely opt out. Then the charters, rather than feeling pressure to improve, rest on the knowledge that some parents will always feel more comfortable with the school having an eject button for other, and at risk, kids.

Some charters do very well, Latin is certainly one, but most do not. The argument for charters is not that they give most kids options, it's that they give the privileged EOTP and a very few number of at risk EOTP an automatic safety net to avoid problem behaviors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is DCPS has lots of faults. But it also has to educate every kid. And ultimately when you create a system where privileged people can opt out, you create a vacuum where the charters have no reason to improve because they have enough families who will opt in and can kick out the kids not performing, and you have DCPS which has little incentive to improve because wealthier parents either concentrate in one area or opt out.

So no one is really improving or being forced to excel, charter or public, because the system does not incentive it.

It sucks. It's also not unique and a real problem with the US education landscape as a whole.

DCPS has to educate every neighborhood kid that enrolls and it runs its own choice program - selective high schools, out of boundary etc. No one ever publishes the rates of the out of boundary kids at DCPS who get sent back to their home school for behavior, attendance, etc. These forced transfers also push students back to DCPS schools. It would be great if information was more transparent so that there could be real analysis of where students are disappearing from some schools and ending up at others, especially mid-year. The public information that is available is on re-enrollment rates. A look at Ward 7 and 8 DCPS high schools has re-enrollment rates somewhere in the low 70's on average. Nearly 30% of students of those schools are either ending up nowhere, at other DCPS choice schools or at charters. So our system needs to support all of the choices because our families are using all of the choices. It's not just the privileged who are opting out. There may be notable failures (or failures to thrive) in the charter sector but that's true in DCPS as well. The notable failures aren't the only story though. There are charters that are doing well and/or improving and the same is true for DCPS.

"Forced transfers" is education consultant speak for CONSEQUENCES. There's a vocal minority in DC that thinks consequences are bad/unfair/discriminatory. I think most parents think them necessary.

Do you like it as much when the expelled kids end up at your kid's school?

That's a false choice. I like consequences...full stop. Kids who fail should not be advanced just because some SJW whines about 18 years olds in 3rd grade classes.

What's your argument? There should be no consequences?

There should definitely be consequences, and services designed to improve the situation. But you need to see that passing them from one school to another isn't a real solution from a district-level perspective. It doesn't help anything. It might feel like a solution to you because a kid might leave your school, but you haven't considered that kids will also come into your school from this. Just saying to kick them out is not thinking through the policy problem.

People who argue that every school should fit every kid are part of how we ended up in this situation. Not every school is ideal for advanced learners. Not every school is ideal for kids with behavioral problems. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on the Arts. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on STEM.

Passing kids from a school that is ill equipped to handle needs to one that can is not a problem, it is part of the solution. We do it all the time. Application schools do it. BASIS does it it too. Nothing wrong with it. What is wrong is people arguing that high standards for behavior, comportment and achievement somehow discriminate.

Part of the disconnect on DCUM is how many posters live either in Ed Consultant-Pedagogy Naval Gazing Land and/or come to these discussions with an elementary school mindset. The world looks very different when school and learning gets real.

Before you go there, there is a chasm between "warehousing bad kids" all in one place and centralizing support systems for kids who need them so we aren't wasting resources. If a kid cannot meet societal norms then they need to go somewhere better equipped to help them overcome those deficits.

Yes to the last part but the school they're being transferred school isn't equipped to handle them, they just don't have a choice.

I firmly agree that there should be more intervention and supports but the system is not set up for that and instead of arguing to address it people flock to charters to entirely opt out. Then the charters, rather than feeling pressure to improve, rest on the knowledge that some parents will always feel more comfortable with the school having an eject button for other, and at risk, kids.

Some charters do very well, Latin is certainly one, but most do not. The argument for charters is not that they give most kids options, it's that they give the privileged EOTP and a very few number of at risk EOTP an automatic safety net to avoid problem behaviors.

Oh okay. So it’s fine for dcps to meet no one’s needs? I could just move to Virginia or Maryland but instead I stay and send my kids to a charter.

Parents can and do push charters to improve. When it comes to dcps I see a lot of boosters (“STUART HOBSON IS MORE IN DEMAND THAN BASIS”) and a lot of despair. You can pretend you’re standing on a high horse by sending your kid to dcps, but all I see is a parent making bad choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is DCPS has lots of faults. But it also has to educate every kid. And ultimately when you create a system where privileged people can opt out, you create a vacuum where the charters have no reason to improve because they have enough families who will opt in and can kick out the kids not performing, and you have DCPS which has little incentive to improve because wealthier parents either concentrate in one area or opt out.

So no one is really improving or being forced to excel, charter or public, because the system does not incentive it.

It sucks. It's also not unique and a real problem with the US education landscape as a whole.

DCPS has to educate every neighborhood kid that enrolls and it runs its own choice program - selective high schools, out of boundary etc. No one ever publishes the rates of the out of boundary kids at DCPS who get sent back to their home school for behavior, attendance, etc. These forced transfers also push students back to DCPS schools. It would be great if information was more transparent so that there could be real analysis of where students are disappearing from some schools and ending up at others, especially mid-year. The public information that is available is on re-enrollment rates. A look at Ward 7 and 8 DCPS high schools has re-enrollment rates somewhere in the low 70's on average. Nearly 30% of students of those schools are either ending up nowhere, at other DCPS choice schools or at charters. So our system needs to support all of the choices because our families are using all of the choices. It's not just the privileged who are opting out. There may be notable failures (or failures to thrive) in the charter sector but that's true in DCPS as well. The notable failures aren't the only story though. There are charters that are doing well and/or improving and the same is true for DCPS.

"Forced transfers" is education consultant speak for CONSEQUENCES. There's a vocal minority in DC that thinks consequences are bad/unfair/discriminatory. I think most parents think them necessary.

Do you like it as much when the expelled kids end up at your kid's school?

That's a false choice. I like consequences...full stop. Kids who fail should not be advanced just because some SJW whines about 18 years olds in 3rd grade classes.

What's your argument? There should be no consequences?

There should definitely be consequences, and services designed to improve the situation. But you need to see that passing them from one school to another isn't a real solution from a district-level perspective. It doesn't help anything. It might feel like a solution to you because a kid might leave your school, but you haven't considered that kids will also come into your school from this. Just saying to kick them out is not thinking through the policy problem.

People who argue that every school should fit every kid are part of how we ended up in this situation. Not every school is ideal for advanced learners. Not every school is ideal for kids with behavioral problems. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on the Arts. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on STEM.

Passing kids from a school that is ill equipped to handle needs to one that can is not a problem, it is part of the solution. We do it all the time. Application schools do it. BASIS does it it too. Nothing wrong with it. What is wrong is people arguing that high standards for behavior, comportment and achievement somehow discriminate.

Part of the disconnect on DCUM is how many posters live either in Ed Consultant-Pedagogy Naval Gazing Land and/or come to these discussions with an elementary school mindset. The world looks very different when school and learning gets real.

Before you go there, there is a chasm between "warehousing bad kids" all in one place and centralizing support systems for kids who need them so we aren't wasting resources. If a kid cannot meet societal norms then they need to go somewhere better equipped to help them overcome those deficits.

Yes to the last part but the school they're being transferred school isn't equipped to handle them, they just don't have a choice.

I firmly agree that there should be more intervention and supports but the system is not set up for that and instead of arguing to address it people flock to charters to entirely opt out. Then the charters, rather than feeling pressure to improve, rest on the knowledge that some parents will always feel more comfortable with the school having an eject button for other, and at risk, kids.

Some charters do very well, Latin is certainly one, but most do not. The argument for charters is not that they give most kids options, it's that they give the privileged EOTP and a very few number of at risk EOTP an automatic safety net to avoid problem behaviors.

Oh okay. So it’s fine for dcps to meet no one’s needs? I could just move to Virginia or Maryland but instead I stay and send my kids to a charter.

Parents can and do push charters to improve. When it comes to dcps I see a lot of boosters (“STUART HOBSON IS MORE IN DEMAND THAN BASIS”) and a lot of despair. You can pretend you’re standing on a high horse by sending your kid to dcps, but all I see is a parent making bad choices.

You're being rational but you are responding to someone who is biased and continues to assert falsehoods about "most" charters. There are charters serving 70%+ at-risk kids EOTP. The statement that those schools "give the privileged EOTP and a very few number of at risk EOTP an automatic safety net to avoid problem behaviors" ignores that these are schools being chosen by families who simply are not privileged and certainly can't be described as "very few number of at-risk."

[Anonymous]

Students who get into Walls are mostly high achieving and self motivated. Apply to college alongside peers at other schools with mostly As. I do not see why they need to be graded on a harsh discouraging curve with lots of Cs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is DCPS has lots of faults. But it also has to educate every kid. And ultimately when you create a system where privileged people can opt out, you create a vacuum where the charters have no reason to improve because they have enough families who will opt in and can kick out the kids not performing, and you have DCPS which has little incentive to improve because wealthier parents either concentrate in one area or opt out.

So no one is really improving or being forced to excel, charter or public, because the system does not incentive it.

It sucks. It's also not unique and a real problem with the US education landscape as a whole.

DCPS has to educate every neighborhood kid that enrolls and it runs its own choice program - selective high schools, out of boundary etc. No one ever publishes the rates of the out of boundary kids at DCPS who get sent back to their home school for behavior, attendance, etc. These forced transfers also push students back to DCPS schools. It would be great if information was more transparent so that there could be real analysis of where students are disappearing from some schools and ending up at others, especially mid-year. The public information that is available is on re-enrollment rates. A look at Ward 7 and 8 DCPS high schools has re-enrollment rates somewhere in the low 70's on average. Nearly 30% of students of those schools are either ending up nowhere, at other DCPS choice schools or at charters. So our system needs to support all of the choices because our families are using all of the choices. It's not just the privileged who are opting out. There may be notable failures (or failures to thrive) in the charter sector but that's true in DCPS as well. The notable failures aren't the only story though. There are charters that are doing well and/or improving and the same is true for DCPS.

"Forced transfers" is education consultant speak for CONSEQUENCES. There's a vocal minority in DC that thinks consequences are bad/unfair/discriminatory. I think most parents think them necessary.

Do you like it as much when the expelled kids end up at your kid's school?

That's a false choice. I like consequences...full stop. Kids who fail should not be advanced just because some SJW whines about 18 years olds in 3rd grade classes.

What's your argument? There should be no consequences?

There should definitely be consequences, and services designed to improve the situation. But you need to see that passing them from one school to another isn't a real solution from a district-level perspective. It doesn't help anything. It might feel like a solution to you because a kid might leave your school, but you haven't considered that kids will also come into your school from this. Just saying to kick them out is not thinking through the policy problem.

People who argue that every school should fit every kid are part of how we ended up in this situation. Not every school is ideal for advanced learners. Not every school is ideal for kids with behavioral problems. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on the Arts. Not every school is ideal for kids who want to focus on STEM.

Passing kids from a school that is ill equipped to handle needs to one that can is not a problem, it is part of the solution. We do it all the time. Application schools do it. BASIS does it it too. Nothing wrong with it. What is wrong is people arguing that high standards for behavior, comportment and achievement somehow discriminate.

Part of the disconnect on DCUM is how many posters live either in Ed Consultant-Pedagogy Naval Gazing Land and/or come to these discussions with an elementary school mindset. The world looks very different when school and learning gets real.

Before you go there, there is a chasm between "warehousing bad kids" all in one place and centralizing support systems for kids who need them so we aren't wasting resources. If a kid cannot meet societal norms then they need to go somewhere better equipped to help them overcome those deficits.

Yes to the last part but the school they're being transferred school isn't equipped to handle them, they just don't have a choice.

I firmly agree that there should be more intervention and supports but the system is not set up for that and instead of arguing to address it people flock to charters to entirely opt out. Then the charters, rather than feeling pressure to improve, rest on the knowledge that some parents will always feel more comfortable with the school having an eject button for other, and at risk, kids.

Some charters do very well, Latin is certainly one, but most do not. The argument for charters is not that they give most kids options, it's that they give the privileged EOTP and a very few number of at risk EOTP an automatic safety net to avoid problem behaviors.

Oh okay. So it’s fine for dcps to meet no one’s needs? I could just move to Virginia or Maryland but instead I stay and send my kids to a charter.

Parents can and do push charters to improve. When it comes to dcps I see a lot of boosters (“STUART HOBSON IS MORE IN DEMAND THAN BASIS”) and a lot of despair. You can pretend you’re standing on a high horse by sending your kid to dcps, but all I see is a parent making bad choices.

You're being rational but you are responding to someone who is biased and continues to assert falsehoods about "most" charters. There are charters serving 70%+ at-risk kids EOTP. The statement that those schools "give the privileged EOTP and a very few number of at risk EOTP an automatic safety net to avoid problem behaviors" ignores that these are schools being chosen by families who simply are not privileged and certainly can't be described as "very few number of at-risk."

I see your point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Students who get into Walls are mostly high achieving and self motivated. Apply to college alongside peers at other schools with mostly As. I do not see why they need to be graded on a harsh discouraging curve with lots of Cs.

How does the interview process screen for high achievement? Spoiler- it doesn’t. Grades are but 10% of the admission criteria. It’s just low standards both for admission and grading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Students who get into Walls are mostly high achieving and self motivated. Apply to college alongside peers at other schools with mostly As. I do not see why they need to be graded on a harsh discouraging curve with lots of Cs.

But that’s okay for Banneker students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was pro-DCPS all through elementary school and up until April of the month we did the middle school charter lottery, got a spot at BASIS, and had a candid conversation with a DCPS middle school teacher who told me straight-up to take the BASIS spot because her DCPS did not meet the needs of advanced students. she wanted to, but the structure of the curriculum, her inabiity to fail students, her principal all kept her from adding enrichment and appropriate instruction for advanced students.

She was really unequivocal and I made my decision immediately after that conversation. She also said getting a seat at BASIS is like getting a prep school education for free, which I think it true about Latin as well. I'm very, very glad we took the spot.

I'm sure I trash talked charters when my kids were young. But the middle school ecosystem in DC is very different than elementary. I recommend doing some research and allowing yourself some grace to change your mind.

Truly appreciate this candor. The trash talking charters and "down with charters" mentality has created an environment in DC where politicians feel comfortable openly under-resourcing charters. It's not a little bit of money - it's estimated at $1,800 per student and that's money that a charter school doesn't have to improve teacher salaries, increase benefits, offer more athletics and clubs or fix sub-par facilities. Ask your charter school principal what they could do with that much more per kid.

Not to mention, the charter school teachers are paid less than their DCPS counterparts.

Not true across the board. Some charters match DCPS pay scale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was pro-DCPS all through elementary school and up until April of the month we did the middle school charter lottery, got a spot at BASIS, and had a candid conversation with a DCPS middle school teacher who told me straight-up to take the BASIS spot because her DCPS did not meet the needs of advanced students. she wanted to, but the structure of the curriculum, her inabiity to fail students, her principal all kept her from adding enrichment and appropriate instruction for advanced students.

She was really unequivocal and I made my decision immediately after that conversation. She also said getting a seat at BASIS is like getting a prep school education for free, which I think it true about Latin as well. I'm very, very glad we took the spot.

I'm sure I trash talked charters when my kids were young. But the middle school ecosystem in DC is very different than elementary. I recommend doing some research and allowing yourself some grace to change your mind.

Truly appreciate this candor. The trash talking charters and "down with charters" mentality has created an environment in DC where politicians feel comfortable openly under-resourcing charters. It's not a little bit of money - it's estimated at $1,800 per student and that's money that a charter school doesn't have to improve teacher salaries, increase benefits, offer more athletics and clubs or fix sub-par facilities. Ask your charter school principal what they could do with that much more per kid.

Not to mention, the charter school teachers are paid less than their DCPS counterparts.

Not true across the board. Some charters match DCPS pay scale.

Not Latin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Students who get into Walls are mostly high achieving and self motivated. Apply to college alongside peers at other schools with mostly As. I do not see why they need to be graded on a harsh discouraging curve with lots of Cs.

But that’s okay for Banneker students?

In our experience, Banneker had a more rigorous application process (two essays). We were more impressed with the school than we were with Walls

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was pro-DCPS all through elementary school and up until April of the month we did the middle school charter lottery, got a spot at BASIS, and had a candid conversation with a DCPS middle school teacher who told me straight-up to take the BASIS spot because her DCPS did not meet the needs of advanced students. she wanted to, but the structure of the curriculum, her inabiity to fail students, her principal all kept her from adding enrichment and appropriate instruction for advanced students.

She was really unequivocal and I made my decision immediately after that conversation. She also said getting a seat at BASIS is like getting a prep school education for free, which I think it true about Latin as well. I'm very, very glad we took the spot.

I'm sure I trash talked charters when my kids were young. But the middle school ecosystem in DC is very different than elementary. I recommend doing some research and allowing yourself some grace to change your mind.

Truly appreciate this candor. The trash talking charters and "down with charters" mentality has created an environment in DC where politicians feel comfortable openly under-resourcing charters. It's not a little bit of money - it's estimated at $1,800 per student and that's money that a charter school doesn't have to improve teacher salaries, increase benefits, offer more athletics and clubs or fix sub-par facilities. Ask your charter school principal what they could do with that much more per kid.

Not to mention, the charter school teachers are paid less than their DCPS counterparts.

Not true across the board. Some charters match DCPS pay scale.

Not Latin.

Teacher here. Latin is notorious for its laughably low teacher salaries.