Time to Stop Counting on Charters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know this because you get to know the other parents at your school. There are highly educated folks too, but don't assume white=highly educated. I've found more Ivy lawyers in Upper NW or private school in my experience. no?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1. In charters, even the non- FARMS kids come from less educated families than you would expect. Yes, even white kids whose parents have HS GED or bachelor's from an easy college.

Anonymous wrote:

Fair enough, I guess. I got free meals in public school and didn't need anyone working double time to get me up to speed. Sure, is anecdotal, but it seems weird to me that someone would not at least consider their in bounds school beyond knowing how many kids get free meals.

There's no question that low SES (in DC parlance, FARMS) kids can achieve. But evidence suggests that as a group they are most successful when the class is less than 50% FARMS. Conversely, when a class is more than 50% FARMS, outcomes are worse for all kids.

This is a cautionary tale to those that think charters are the answer (separate and apart from teh admissions issues) - unless you are in a charter that uses the unsavory practice of "counseling out" low SES kids, or making them feel otherwise unwelcome, you're going to run into this issue over. My kids are in a very highly-sought after charter - one of those previously mentioned in this thread - and it's not all sunshine and roses.

And you know this how? We love our charter and feel like our family fits right in - two Ivy educated lawyers. Our kid is biracial, Asian/White, are there are many similar families like us and many unlike us why is another reason we chose it over private schools.

All the white parents I've met at my charter are highly-educated professionals. Anecdote does not equal data. So I hear you about your experience but it is not universal either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1. In charters, even the non- FARMS kids come from less educated families than you would expect. Yes, even white kids whose parents have HS GED or bachelor's from an easy college.

Anonymous wrote:

Fair enough, I guess. I got free meals in public school and didn't need anyone working double time to get me up to speed. Sure, is anecdotal, but it seems weird to me that someone would not at least consider their in bounds school beyond knowing how many kids get free meals.

There's no question that low SES (in DC parlance, FARMS) kids can achieve. But evidence suggests that as a group they are most successful when the class is less than 50% FARMS. Conversely, when a class is more than 50% FARMS, outcomes are worse for all kids.

This is a cautionary tale to those that think charters are the answer (separate and apart from teh admissions issues) - unless you are in a charter that uses the unsavory practice of "counseling out" low SES kids, or making them feel otherwise unwelcome, you're going to run into this issue over. My kids are in a very highly-sought after charter - one of those previously mentioned in this thread - and it's not all sunshine and roses.

PP, what is your in bounds ES, if you don't mind sharing?
And you know this how? We love our charter and feel like our family fits right in - two Ivy educated lawyers. Our kid is biracial, Asian/White, are there are many similar families like us and many unlike us why is another reason we chose it over private schools.

I agree. We are two college-educated professionals in a charter and it is a broad SES mix that doesn't necessarily break down HHI-wise by race/ethnicity like most people assume. My kid is doing great. He actually has a greater need on the social/emotional side and they are doing a great job on that front. I'm glad he has a diverse mix of kids to socialize with. This is in contrast to our IB school which would have been 99% AA/1% Hispanic and majority FARMS with low test scores and an administration that can't even bother to return my fucking phone call as a neighbor and a prospective parent. That is not diversity by any measure. I wasn't about to plop my pale blond kid in that environment as the only one IN THE ENTIRE SCHOOL, especially when their attitude was less than welcoming. I feel pretty confident that the parent population at my charter is overall better educated than my IB school and has a better attitude/work ethic about school. Is it all "sunshine and roses?" No. Is it better than our other alternatives? Oh hell yes. Yes it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1. In charters, even the non- FARMS kids come from less educated families than you would expect. Yes, even white kids whose parents have HS GED or bachelor's from an easy college.

Anonymous wrote:

Fair enough, I guess. I got free meals in public school and didn't need anyone working double time to get me up to speed. Sure, is anecdotal, but it seems weird to me that someone would not at least consider their in bounds school beyond knowing how many kids get free meals.

There's no question that low SES (in DC parlance, FARMS) kids can achieve. But evidence suggests that as a group they are most successful when the class is less than 50% FARMS. Conversely, when a class is more than 50% FARMS, outcomes are worse for all kids.

This is a cautionary tale to those that think charters are the answer (separate and apart from teh admissions issues) - unless you are in a charter that uses the unsavory practice of "counseling out" low SES kids, or making them feel otherwise unwelcome, you're going to run into this issue over. My kids are in a very highly-sought after charter - one of those previously mentioned in this thread - and it's not all sunshine and roses.

PP, what is your in bounds ES, if you don't mind sharing?
And you know this how? We love our charter and feel like our family fits right in - two Ivy educated lawyers. Our kid is biracial, Asian/White, are there are many similar families like us and many unlike us why is another reason we chose it over private schools.

I agree. We are two college-educated professionals in a charter and it is a broad SES mix that doesn't necessarily break down HHI-wise by race/ethnicity like most people assume. My kid is doing great. He actually has a greater need on the social/emotional side and they are doing a great job on that front. I'm glad he has a diverse mix of kids to socialize with. This is in contrast to our IB school which would have been 99% AA/1% Hispanic and majority FARMS with low test scores and an administration that can't even bother to return my fucking phone call as a neighbor and a prospective parent. That is not diversity by any measure. I wasn't about to plop my pale blond kid in that environment as the only one IN THE ENTIRE SCHOOL, especially when their attitude was less than welcoming. I feel pretty confident that the parent population at my charter is overall better educated than my IB school and has a better attitude/work ethic about school. Is it all "sunshine and roses?" No. Is it better than our other alternatives? Oh hell yes. Yes it is.

Sorry but no, I won't tell my IB school. I want to sell my house in the next 2 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where do you get your 90% stat? And for the last couple of years every house on my Petworth street has sold within a week of going on the market. Not too worried about that, especially considering my house has appreciated 300% since purchasing it a decade ago. Anyway, please do gather your troops and take over your local school to improve it...you're in for a rude awakening. Just check out the thread about Payne Elementary and what happened when too many middle class families showed an interest...you'll spin your wheels and realize that your child's childhood is over.

I am making the stat up, but going with the fact that this year there were thousands of families that applied for the popular charters and only a handful, mostly those who already have siblings in the school, who will get in. I understand that TODAY most people who have kids in those areas were able to get in to charters in the past, but the situation has changed and those with kids younger are not getting in. And yes, the housing market it hot NOW, but once people learn that charters are no longer a realistic option, do you think as many families will flock to these neighborhoods?

It doesn't sound like you are clear on the definition of "fact" (And while we're at it, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data")

Before everybody flips out that "thousands of families" applied and "only a handful" will get in let's dial back the hysteria and look at hard numbers. Does someone have a census number for babies born 3 years ago? Something to compare to, say, 5 or 6 years ago? Bear in mind that even though there are a couple thousand names on a WL (a la 2 Rivers) those same names will be on LOTS of different WLs, both DCPS and PCS and all the way from PS3 to 12 (which covers 15 grades). So far, there's nothing convincing to suggest that this lottery season is any different from any other.

[Anonymous]

50% FARMS... A naive person might ask, "How is it that a city with so many high-income, high powered opportunities, where the brightest and most talented people from all over the country, and for that matter come from all over the world to work, has so many low-income families?"

I'll tell the truth that nobody wants to hear - it's the co-dependent clinging. Low-income residents stay because of the overly generous social safety net to keep them here, and DC politicians cling to that infrastructure and keep it in place because they know they can control and manipulate those votes.

Everyone knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:50% FARMS... A naive person might ask, "How is it that a city with so many high-income, high powered opportunities, where the brightest and most talented people from all over the country, and for that matter come from all over the world to work, has so many low-income families?"

I'll tell the truth that nobody wants to hear - it's the co-dependent clinging. Low-income residents stay because of the overly generous social safety net to keep them here, and DC politicians cling to that infrastructure and keep it in place because they know they can control and manipulate those votes.

Everyone knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.

I will completely agree with you on an anonymous board...lol
There is little motivation to get out of the low-income bracket to middle....where you get no help at all and are thrown to the wolves...might as well stay low SES where you are safe and sound, sometimes insurance, housing costs and childcare makes me wonder why we work so hard to be in the low middle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:50% FARMS... A naive person might ask, "How is it that a city with so many high-income, high powered opportunities, where the brightest and most talented people from all over the country, and for that matter come from all over the world to work, has so many low-income families?"

I'll tell the truth that nobody wants to hear - it's the co-dependent clinging. Low-income residents stay because of the overly generous social safety net to keep them here, and DC politicians cling to that infrastructure and keep it in place because they know they can control and manipulate those votes.

Everyone knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.

This is such a ridiculous myth that people who haven't lived in poverty love to believe. How much do you know about the safety net? Most people who throw this tired argument out have little knowledge of how the safety net actually works, and couldnt explain the difference between TANF and SNAP if they needed to actually stand behind the claim with a well thought out argument. What do you want people to do? Move to a state that provides fewer benefits so that they are even further in poverty, but pehaps they can be homeless, too, and with even less of a chance of escaping poverty.

You try living in poverty for a year and then decide if that's the luxurious lifestyle keeping people in DC.

[Anonymous]

My experience with the lottery over the past couple of years reminds me that charter schools cannot substitute for a high quality public education system. DCPS is no easy fix either at the school or city level but the alternative perpetual lotteries and cross city commutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% FARMS... A naive person might ask, "How is it that a city with so many high-income, high powered opportunities, where the brightest and most talented people from all over the country, and for that matter come from all over the world to work, has so many low-income families?"

I'll tell the truth that nobody wants to hear - it's the co-dependent clinging. Low-income residents stay because of the overly generous social safety net to keep them here, and DC politicians cling to that infrastructure and keep it in place because they know they can control and manipulate those votes.

Everyone knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.

This is such a ridiculous myth that people who haven't lived in poverty love to believe. How much do you know about the safety net? Most people who throw this tired argument out have little knowledge of how the safety net actually works, and couldnt explain the difference between TANF and SNAP if they needed to actually stand behind the claim with a well thought out argument. What do you want people to do? Move to a state that provides fewer benefits so that they are even further in poverty, but pehaps they can be homeless, too, and with even less of a chance of escaping poverty.

You try living in poverty for a year and then decide if that's the luxurious lifestyle keeping people in DC.

It must be a pleasure to live in a world where complex issues ca be distillers to a canard. Is Rush Limbaugh taking a commercial break?

[Anonymous]

Maybe the PP should try the SNAP challenge and live on $4 per person per day and then come back and post about the generosity of the social safety net. Talk about living in a bubble. I sure s/he is equally outraged about corporate welfare in the form of subsidies to big pharmacy, big oil and agribusiness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know this because you get to know the other parents at your school. There are highly educated folks too, but don't assume white=highly educated. I've found more Ivy lawyers in Upper NW or private school in my experience. no?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1. In charters, even the non- FARMS kids come from less educated families than you would expect. Yes, even white kids whose parents have HS GED or bachelor's from an easy college.

Anonymous wrote:

Fair enough, I guess. I got free meals in public school and didn't need anyone working double time to get me up to speed. Sure, is anecdotal, but it seems weird to me that someone would not at least consider their in bounds school beyond knowing how many kids get free meals.

There's no question that low SES (in DC parlance, FARMS) kids can achieve. But evidence suggests that as a group they are most successful when the class is less than 50% FARMS. Conversely, when a class is more than 50% FARMS, outcomes are worse for all kids.

This is a cautionary tale to those that think charters are the answer (separate and apart from teh admissions issues) - unless you are in a charter that uses the unsavory practice of "counseling out" low SES kids, or making them feel otherwise unwelcome, you're going to run into this issue over. My kids are in a very highly-sought after charter - one of those previously mentioned in this thread - and it's not all sunshine and roses.

And you know this how? We love our charter and feel like our family fits right in - two Ivy educated lawyers. Our kid is biracial, Asian/White, are there are many similar families like us and many unlike us why is another reason we chose it over private schools.

If you think only the children of Ivy-educated lawyers are good enough to rub elbows with your kid, do us all a favor and send Larla to private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where do you get your 90% stat? And for the last couple of years every house on my Petworth street has sold within a week of going on the market. Not too worried about that, especially considering my house has appreciated 300% since purchasing it a decade ago. Anyway, please do gather your troops and take over your local school to improve it...you're in for a rude awakening. Just check out the thread about Payne Elementary and what happened when too many middle class families showed an interest...you'll spin your wheels and realize that your child's childhood is over.

I am making the stat up, but going with the fact that this year there were thousands of families that applied for the popular charters and only a handful, mostly those who already have siblings in the school, who will get in. I understand that TODAY most people who have kids in those areas were able to get in to charters in the past, but the situation has changed and those with kids younger are not getting in. And yes, the housing market it hot NOW, but once people learn that charters are no longer a realistic option, do you think as many families will flock to these neighborhoods?

It doesn't sound like you are clear on the definition of "fact" (And while we're at it, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data")

Before everybody flips out that "thousands of families" applied and "only a handful" will get in let's dial back the hysteria and look at hard numbers. Does someone have a census number for babies born 3 years ago? Something to compare to, say, 5 or 6 years ago? Bear in mind that even though there are a couple thousand names on a WL (a la 2 Rivers) those same names will be on LOTS of different WLs, both DCPS and PCS and all the way from PS3 to 12 (which covers 15 grades). So far, there's nothing convincing to suggest that this lottery season is any different from any other.

There may not be more children than there were two years ago, but with WOTP families choosing to go to DCPS at a higher rate than they used to, and with many of the newer charters now offering their slots to mostly siblings, families definitely have fewer choices than they did even a year or two ago. Most of the WOTP schools now are totally IB for pre-k, unlike just 2-3 years ago when you at least had a chance to get in OOB at Ross, Stoddert, Hyde, Murch, or Eaton. Those schools are pretty much all IB now at the lower grades, so EOTP families don't have those as an option anymore.

I am not a demographer, nor am I an expert on DC school statistics. Yes I realize this is anecdotal. But I do know that I applied for preschools 2 years ago when Mundo Verde was brand new so all of the spots were open. There were about 250 on the wait list and 30+ got in. This year there are over 500 on the wait list and the only kids that got in were siblings. The same has happened at other schools. You cannot deny that things feel different this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% FARMS... A naive person might ask, "How is it that a city with so many high-income, high powered opportunities, where the brightest and most talented people from all over the country, and for that matter come from all over the world to work, has so many low-income families?"

I'll tell the truth that nobody wants to hear - it's the co-dependent clinging. Low-income residents stay because of the overly generous social safety net to keep them here, and DC politicians cling to that infrastructure and keep it in place because they know they can control and manipulate those votes.

Everyone knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.

I will completely agree with you on an anonymous board...lol
There is little motivation to get out of the low-income bracket to middle....where you get no help at all and are thrown to the wolves...might as well stay low SES where you are safe and sound, sometimes insurance, housing costs and childcare makes me wonder why we work so hard to be in the low middle

Go live in the hood then, no ones stopping you. In fact go all out, give away all your possessions including your car, do a house swap in Barry Farms, quit your job and go on welfare. We'll check in with you next year to see how you're doing!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% FARMS... A naive person might ask, "How is it that a city with so many high-income, high powered opportunities, where the brightest and most talented people from all over the country, and for that matter come from all over the world to work, has so many low-income families?"

I'll tell the truth that nobody wants to hear - it's the co-dependent clinging. Low-income residents stay because of the overly generous social safety net to keep them here, and DC politicians cling to that infrastructure and keep it in place because they know they can control and manipulate those votes.

Everyone knows it, but nobody wants to admit it.

I will completely agree with you on an anonymous board...lol
There is little motivation to get out of the low-income bracket to middle....where you get no help at all and are thrown to the wolves...might as well stay low SES where you are safe and sound, sometimes insurance, housing costs and childcare makes me wonder why we work so hard to be in the low middle

I guess my two sisters and I would kindly disagree. We grew up in DC. With the assistance of Food stamps, Medicaid and perhaps assistance we survived. As adults, not one of us has utilized those services. We all worked hard to become a part of the middle income. One is lower middle and the other is middle-middle. I would consider my HI of 240k upper middle. But I know on DCUM that is considered barely surviving.

You guys really need to check your biases and prejudices, for you no not what you type. There is no safety in poverty. Only a fool would believe that. And before you say my story is anecdotal, it is not. I no many former classmates that have similar experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this because you get to know the other parents at your school. There are highly educated folks too, but don't assume white=highly educated. I've found more Ivy lawyers in Upper NW or private school in my experience. no?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1. In charters, even the non- FARMS kids come from less educated families than you would expect. Yes, even white kids whose parents have HS GED or bachelor's from an easy college.

Anonymous wrote:

Fair enough, I guess. I got free meals in public school and didn't need anyone working double time to get me up to speed. Sure, is anecdotal, but it seems weird to me that someone would not at least consider their in bounds school beyond knowing how many kids get free meals.

There's no question that low SES (in DC parlance, FARMS) kids can achieve. But evidence suggests that as a group they are most successful when the class is less than 50% FARMS. Conversely, when a class is more than 50% FARMS, outcomes are worse for all kids.

This is a cautionary tale to those that think charters are the answer (separate and apart from teh admissions issues) - unless you are in a charter that uses the unsavory practice of "counseling out" low SES kids, or making them feel otherwise unwelcome, you're going to run into this issue over. My kids are in a very highly-sought after charter - one of those previously mentioned in this thread - and it's not all sunshine and roses.

And you know this how? We love our charter and feel like our family fits right in - two Ivy educated lawyers. Our kid is biracial, Asian/White, are there are many similar families like us and many unlike us why is another reason we chose it over private schools.

If you think only the children of Ivy-educated lawyers are good enough to rub elbows with your kid, do us all a favor and send Larla to private school.

If you want to introduce a straw man and argue with yourself be my guest.