Mayor Plans to Underfund Charter Schools

[Anonymous]

Good to see all the WTU members responding when they should be teaching.

Not surprising that you all are more focused on the adults in the schools rather than the kids. "Rewarding unions is more important than funding students fairly," is a great summary of your orientation.

Who cares if it means that half the kids in the city will receive fewer resources. Their parents should have sent them to the failing school down the block because the teachers there are in a union.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good to see all the WTU members responding when they should be teaching.

Not surprising that you all are more focused on the adults in the schools rather than the kids. "Rewarding unions is more important than funding students fairly," is a great summary of your orientation.

Who cares if it means that half the kids in the city will receive fewer resources. Their parents should have sent them to the failing school down the block because the teachers there are in a union.

Sorry not sorry I support paying teachers teach my kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good to see all the WTU members responding when they should be teaching.

Not surprising that you all are more focused on the adults in the schools rather than the kids. "Rewarding unions is more important than funding students fairly," is a great summary of your orientation.

Who cares if it means that half the kids in the city will receive fewer resources. Their parents should have sent them to the failing school down the block because the teachers there are in a union.

I'm not even a teacher let alone a WTU member but kids aren't receiving fewer resources. They are however keeping teachers in schools, creating stability, allowing for teachers to not burn out. My kid's school is as good as it is because of the teachers and they deserve the protections of a union.

I have no idea why people on this board hate teachers so much but sheesh.

[Anonymous]

All I know is DCPS schools need more funding. Many schools need more supports for disadvantaged students, and the NW schools need smaller classes. And all the schools need less curriculum and materials dictated by Central Office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't really see a problem is giving more money to DCPS schools over charters if you're forced to make school budgeting decisions. I didn't vote for Bowser and think she's far too conservative but public schools are required to take every kid, including kids charters routinely kick out. That means per pupil spending has to be higher.

I'd also note charters are also anti union which means less stability in teaching positions overall.

This city has bent over backwards for charters often at the expense of overall student education and well being.

When has the city bent over backwards for charters? Ever?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tubman’s budget was cut by $1.2 million costing them an estimated 12 positions. Suddenly DCPS says the hold harmless provisions no longer apply and they say the school will have an enrollment drop of 152. This is because they are in a swing space. It’s funny the Post article mentioned schools with smaller cuts but not this one.

+1

Tubman is getting totally screwed by this budget. A 9% DECREASE. Of course they lost enrollment when they moved to a swing space. EVERYBODY loses enrollment when they go to a swing space. To ditch a bunch of teachers for one year, when of course enrollment will go way up the next year in the new building, is absurd. Tubman has been improving so much (highest test score improvements in the city last year) and this is just a slap in the face.

Charter schools can cry me a river.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read OP's link and it says funding for charter schools is INCREASING

Did you miss this paragraph?

"Overall, Bowser’s proposed fiscal 2026 budget would send $2.9 billion to public schools in the District — a $123 million increase over the 2025 budget. Her plan directs $75 million to D.C. Public Schools and $48 million to the city’s charter campuses."

Would you be OK with charter schools getting $75M more money while DCPS gets $48M?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read OP's link and it says funding for charter schools is INCREASING

Did you miss this paragraph?

"Overall, Bowser’s proposed fiscal 2026 budget would send $2.9 billion to public schools in the District — a $123 million increase over the 2025 budget. Her plan directs $75 million to D.C. Public Schools and $48 million to the city’s charter campuses."

Would you be OK with charter schools getting $75M more money while DCPS gets $48M?

DCPS has more students total, so yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read OP's link and it says funding for charter schools is INCREASING

Did you miss this paragraph?

"Overall, Bowser’s proposed fiscal 2026 budget would send $2.9 billion to public schools in the District — a $123 million increase over the 2025 budget. Her plan directs $75 million to D.C. Public Schools and $48 million to the city’s charter campuses."

Would you be OK with charter schools getting $75M more money while DCPS gets $48M?

DCPS has more students total, so yes.

I mean, DCPS has more students total, so obviously DCPS gets more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't really see a problem is giving more money to DCPS schools over charters if you're forced to make school budgeting decisions. I didn't vote for Bowser and think she's far too conservative but public schools are required to take every kid, including kids charters routinely kick out. That means per pupil spending has to be higher.

I'd also note charters are also anti union which means less stability in teaching positions overall.

This city has bent over backwards for charters often at the expense of overall student education and well being.

This. DCPS winds up with all the toughest kids with the biggest issues. There's a huge self-selection bias in charters and many charters don't have need for funding to address a large volume of SpEd and at risk kids. Charters also don't, for the most part, have unionized teachers (something that bugs me about charters, but their choice) and as a result DCPS must spend more on teachers. Having a larger SpEd and at-risk population compounds this issue because teachers in Title 1 schools are guaranteed more money and SpEd teachers needs special certifications that also increase their pay (plus there's a huge shortage in SpEd educators and you have to be competitive to fill vacancies). Charters don't deal with these issues on the same level.

Also, a lot of the funding for DCPS contributes positively to neighborhoods and communities in ways that charters do not. When you renovate a DCPS school, you wind up with a nice new playground that serves the entire neighborhood whether the kids attend that school or not (while charters generally reserve their playgrounds for their students only and lock them up when school is not in session). DCPS schools provide summer programming for all district kids, their fields host soccer camps and leagues, the schools serve as voting locations. Charters don't do any of this.

Oops, sorry, I meant to post something balanced and then forgot myself and posted my real feelings about how charters aren't good for communities and don't serve the population well. Sorry I guess. Carry on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really see a problem is giving more money to DCPS schools over charters if you're forced to make school budgeting decisions. I didn't vote for Bowser and think she's far too conservative but public schools are required to take every kid, including kids charters routinely kick out. That means per pupil spending has to be higher.

I'd also note charters are also anti union which means less stability in teaching positions overall.

This city has bent over backwards for charters often at the expense of overall student education and well being.

When has the city bent over backwards for charters? Ever?

Why should the city bend over backwards for charters? The focus should always be on DCPS.

[Anonymous]

How much public money was spent unwinding the clusterf*ck that was Eagle Academy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read OP's link and it says funding for charter schools is INCREASING

Did you miss this paragraph?

"Overall, Bowser’s proposed fiscal 2026 budget would send $2.9 billion to public schools in the District — a $123 million increase over the 2025 budget. Her plan directs $75 million to D.C. Public Schools and $48 million to the city’s charter campuses."

Would you be OK with charter schools getting $75M more money while DCPS gets $48M?

DCPS has more students total, so yes.

I mean, DCPS has more students total, so obviously DCPS gets more.

But in this case DCPS is getting disproportionately more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good to see all the WTU members responding when they should be teaching.

Not surprising that you all are more focused on the adults in the schools rather than the kids. "Rewarding unions is more important than funding students fairly," is a great summary of your orientation.

Who cares if it means that half the kids in the city will receive fewer resources. Their parents should have sent them to the failing school down the block because the teachers there are in a union.

Not a WTU member, not even a teacher, and I actually have beef with WTU because I blame them for keeping DCPS closed longer than it should have been during Covid.

But I do support paying teachers well. I've had kids in DCPS for 5 years and while I have lots of complaints about the school district and administration, we've had phenomenal teachers. Even the ones who were not a perfect fit for one of my kids were still fantastic teachers. And DCPS gets good quality teachers because they pay well. The district also rewards years of service and advanced education in a meaningful way. My kids have only ever had one teacher who didn't have a masters, and she was in a part-time masters program. We've had teachers who were 20 year veterans but who still learn new methods for teaching, stay up on the latest pedagogy, etc. Our school has been teaching phonics all along, for instance.

I think parents who have only ever experienced charters in DC sometimes don't realize that what they think are the problems in DCPS are not the problems. The teachers are NOT the problems in DCPS. That's a worthwhile place to spend funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really see a problem is giving more money to DCPS schools over charters if you're forced to make school budgeting decisions. I didn't vote for Bowser and think she's far too conservative but public schools are required to take every kid, including kids charters routinely kick out. That means per pupil spending has to be higher.

I'd also note charters are also anti union which means less stability in teaching positions overall.

This city has bent over backwards for charters often at the expense of overall student education and well being.

When has the city bent over backwards for charters? Ever?

Why should the city bend over backwards for charters? The focus should always be on DCPS.

No one ever said they should bend over backwards.

But the PP did say they HAD. Which is untrue.