Charter Schools giving neighborhood preferance

[Anonymous]

To return to the entire point of the thread (neighborhood preference), I find it interesting that the idea is being promoted by "District officials" (whoever those are). My reading of the article indicated that actual charter leaders weren't particularly interested. I think this makes it a lot less likely than some folks would like to imagine.

[Anonymous]

I actually makes zero sense and would further divide the city and undermine an already fragile DCPS. It's all political pandering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To return to the entire point of the thread (neighborhood preference), I find it interesting that the idea is being promoted by "District officials" (whoever those are). My reading of the article indicated that actual charter leaders weren't particularly interested. I think this makes it a lot less likely than some folks would like to imagine.

It's supported by some members of the Council, who have actual authority to make and change laws. I think that charter leaders have less power than almost anyone over the actual content of the charter school law. What the most powerful people (the Council? US Congress? business leaders?) want will be what happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To return to the entire point of the thread (neighborhood preference), I find it interesting that the idea is being promoted by "District officials" (whoever those are). My reading of the article indicated that actual charter leaders weren't particularly interested. I think this makes it a lot less likely than some folks would like to imagine.

It's supported by some members of the Council, who have actual authority to make and change laws. I think that charter leaders have less power than almost anyone over the actual content of the charter school law. What the most powerful people (the Council? US Congress? business leaders?) want will be what happens.

Yes, but I believe the proposed law states that Charters are permitted to give a neighborhood preference, not that they're required to. Big difference (although this could lead the way to extortionate neighborhood preference demands for newly formed charters, which is another reason it's a bad idea).

[Anonymous]

Yes. It's important to remember that existing charters will not have to give preference---the law (if passed and highly unlikely) would apply only to NEW charters going forward. Very few, if any, existing charters will give neighborhood preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To return to the entire point of the thread (neighborhood preference), I find it interesting that the idea is being promoted by "District officials" (whoever those are). My reading of the article indicated that actual charter leaders weren't particularly interested. I think this makes it a lot less likely than some folks would like to imagine.

It's supported by some members of the Council, who have actual authority to make and change laws. I think that charter leaders have less power than almost anyone over the actual content of the charter school law. What the most powerful people (the Council? US Congress? business leaders?) want will be what happens.

Yes, but I believe the proposed law states that Charters are permitted to give a neighborhood preference, not that they're required to. Big difference (although this could lead the way to extortionate neighborhood preference demands for newly formed charters, which is another reason it's a bad idea).

Exactly. Even if it goes forward, the schools don't have to implement it, it's merely an option. If it were adopted by any of the schools that get so much chatter on this board, it would make it even harder for poorer, lower-SES children east of the river to get in. Nobody is going to support that outcome. Proximity to a school like Latin, is not going to help you get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was the parent fighting a student? Another parent?

Here's what I saw, around 3:30 PM Friday afternoon, while driving by on E Street: male, looked to be in his 30s, being handcuffed while pushed against a squad car parked across the street from the main entrance of SH. Kids were pouring out of the school at the time. A few adults, probably parents, were shouting "drug dealer!" and several girls, who appeared to be students, were in tears.

Sounds more like a pimp.

Why the hell would you assume a pimp? Why not a drug dealer like the students accused? Just because there were females crying? It's funny when I try to convince myself that staying in DC as opposed to CA was a good idea because people here are so open minded it's posts like these that remind me how closed minded and oftentimes racist DCUMs are.

[Anonymous]

Mhy is a pimp more (or less) racist than a drug dealer? I fail to see the race angle here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mhy is a pimp more (or less) racist than a drug dealer? I fail to see the race angle here.

+1

[Anonymous]

Where did PP get pimp from?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mhy is a pimp more (or less) racist than a drug dealer? I fail to see the race angle here.

Because PP just arbitrarily added pump with no basis for her assumption. She suggests a pimp after drug dealer was already thrown out there. Any more stereotypes you wanna throw out there? Maybe he was being hemmed up because he's a baby daddy thats not paying his child support. Suggesting he was a pimp is just as rediculous as suggesting a white man being arrested is a rapist, serial killer, tax evader, meth head, or a child murderer. Can't we have a conversation without suggesting stereotypes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mhy is a pimp more (or less) racist than a drug dealer? I fail to see the race angle here.

Because PP just arbitrarily added pump with no basis for her assumption. She suggests a pimp after drug dealer was already thrown out there. Any more stereotypes you wanna throw out there? Maybe he was being hemmed up because he's a baby daddy thats not paying his child support. Suggesting he was a pimp is just as rediculous as suggesting a white man being arrested is a rapist, serial killer, tax evader, meth head, or a child murderer. Can't we have a conversation without suggesting stereotypes?

Where is there any indication that the man being arrested was not white? I didn't see any reference to that. It's YOU who just assumed that. Maybe you should check your own stereotypes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mhy is a pimp more (or less) racist than a drug dealer? I fail to see the race angle here.

Because PP just arbitrarily added pump with no basis for her assumption. She suggests a pimp after drug dealer was already thrown out there. Any more stereotypes you wanna throw out there? Maybe he was being hemmed up because he's a baby daddy thats not paying his child support. Suggesting he was a pimp is just as rediculous as suggesting a white man being arrested is a rapist, serial killer, tax evader, meth head, or a child murderer. Can't we have a conversation without suggesting stereotypes?

Where is there any indication that the man being arrested was not white? I didn't see any reference to that. It's YOU who just assumed that. Maybe you should check your own stereotypes.

Right. Only one person is being racist here. Maybe you have difficulty having a discussion that doesn't suggest stereotypes because you keep bringing them up!

[Anonymous]

So the PP was implying it could have been a white drug dealing pimp being arrested outside of an 80% black school. Right. That statement wasn't stereotyping, it was calling a spade a spade. I saw unicorns flying down Pennsylvania Ave last night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the PP was implying it could have been a white drug dealing pimp being arrested outside of an 80% black school. Right. That statement wasn't stereotyping, it was calling a spade a spade. I saw unicorns flying down Pennsylvania Ave last night.

How is "calling a spade a spade" not stereotyping? What do you think stereotyping is?