All charters are not created equally

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our experience in 2 HRCS has been a very negative one. We have seen time and time again how teachers are constantly trying to fundraise for the school and how grades are directly proportionate to the amount of donation given by the family.

We tried everything in order not to believe in it but there is way too much evidence...

BS meter is off the charts for claims like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our experience in 2 HRCS has been a very negative one. We have seen time and time again how teachers are constantly trying to fundraise for the school and how grades are directly proportionate to the amount of donation given by the family.

We tried everything in order not to believe in it but there is way too much evidence...

BS meter is off the charts for claims like this.

NP here. I have no idea which "HRCS" they are talking about, but in four years at MV, I have never had one single teacher ever fundraise. The fundraising coordinator does, but she is the only one, and she is not a teacher, but a professional fundraiser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who lumps all charters and all DCPS into one mass catagory is just a troll stiring the pot.

Is Janney better than Mundo Verde? Is CMI better than Key? What is the measure you are using to rank these schools? Test scores? Parent satisfaction?

Aren't CMI and Mundo Verde brand new, untested schools?

CMI has test scores. MV does not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some people hear charter and automatically assume that the quality of education will be better than traditional public school. I have seen some charters that offer rigor and structure but no warmth. I have seen others that were just as out of chaotic and disorganized as some public school classrooms. If people would stop lumping all charters togethers it would make it easier for parents to decide what setting is best for their child. Here is an article on charters in the DC area and how they differ in their academic offerings.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/07/charter-schools-dc-what-works-120222.html#.Va1onotQdFJ

The obvious point is that charter schools are often significantly better than the specific public schools those kids in said charters would have otherwise attended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people hear charter and automatically assume that the quality of education will be better than traditional public school. I have seen some charters that offer rigor and structure but no warmth. I have seen others that were just as out of chaotic and disorganized as some public school classrooms. If people would stop lumping all charters togethers it would make it easier for parents to decide what setting is best for their child. Here is an article on charters in the DC area and how they differ in their academic offerings.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/07/charter-schools-dc-what-works-120222.html#.Va1onotQdFJ

The obvious point is that charter schools are often significantly better than the specific public schools those kids in said charters would have otherwise attended.

+1. Sometimes worth stating the obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our experience in 2 HRCS has been a very negative one. We have seen time and time again how teachers are constantly trying to fundraise for the school and how grades are directly proportionate to the amount of donation given by the family.

We tried everything in order not to believe in it but there is way too much evidence...

This has never happened in our experience in two charters popular on DCUM (we left the first one for an immersion opportunity).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our experience in 2 HRCS has been a very negative one. We have seen time and time again how teachers are constantly trying to fundraise for the school and how grades are directly proportionate to the amount of donation given by the family.

We tried everything in order not to believe in it but there is way too much evidence...

This has never happened in our experience in two charters popular on DCUM (we left the first one for an immersion opportunity).

We have been at Appletree and two popular charters (like PP left for immersion) and have never experienced this either.

[Anonymous]

What stood out to me in this article is that they had funds to do things that would never be available in the public school system. For example what the college counselors could do. What I see especially for those charters that can pull in kids from poorly performing areas, is that they can provide non-academic supports that make a huge difference. Sometimes this does not mean they have higher scores but they increase connections and opportunities that helps a group of highly motivated kids find a way out. We just had a family friend graduate from Wilson. He comes from a very poor family and has lots of needs, but they just could not help him in the way say KIPP probably could have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who lumps all charters and all DCPS into one mass catagory is just a troll stiring the pot.

Is Janney better than Mundo Verde? Is CMI better than Key? What is the measure you are using to rank these schools? Test scores? Parent satisfaction?

Aren't CMI and Mundo Verde brand new, untested schools?

CMI has test scores. MV does not.

when will MV have scores? or a playground?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who lumps all charters and all DCPS into one mass catagory is just a troll stiring the pot.

Is Janney better than Mundo Verde? Is CMI better than Key? What is the measure you are using to rank these schools? Test scores? Parent satisfaction?

Aren't CMI and Mundo Verde brand new, untested schools?

CMI has test scores. MV does not.

when will MV have scores? or a playground?

They'll be coming for you pp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What stood out to me in this article is that they had funds to do things that would never be available in the public school system. For example what the college counselors could do. What I see especially for those charters that can pull in kids from poorly performing areas, is that they can provide non-academic supports that make a huge difference. Sometimes this does not mean they have higher scores but they increase connections and opportunities that helps a group of highly motivated kids find a way out. We just had a family friend graduate from Wilson. He comes from a very poor family and has lots of needs, but they just could not help him in the way say KIPP probably could have.

Charters generally have less funds than DCPS but have more freedom on how to spend what they do get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What stood out to me in this article is that they had funds to do things that would never be available in the public school system. For example what the college counselors could do. What I see especially for those charters that can pull in kids from poorly performing areas, is that they can provide non-academic supports that make a huge difference. Sometimes this does not mean they have higher scores but they increase connections and opportunities that helps a group of highly motivated kids find a way out. We just had a family friend graduate from Wilson. He comes from a very poor family and has lots of needs, but they just could not help him in the way say KIPP probably could have.

Charters generally have less funds than DCPS but have more freedom on how to spend what they do get.

Yes, charters have more freedom to experiment with your children. Sometimes it works, and sometimes...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What stood out to me in this article is that they had funds to do things that would never be available in the public school system. For example what the college counselors could do. What I see especially for those charters that can pull in kids from poorly performing areas, is that they can provide non-academic supports that make a huge difference. Sometimes this does not mean they have higher scores but they increase connections and opportunities that helps a group of highly motivated kids find a way out. We just had a family friend graduate from Wilson. He comes from a very poor family and has lots of needs, but they just could not help him in the way say KIPP probably could have.

Charters generally have less funds than DCPS but have more freedom on how to spend what they do get.

Yes, charters have more freedom to experiment with your children. Sometimes it works, and sometimes...

If you don't want something new and potentially untested, don't send your kid to a charter school. Talk about stating the obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What stood out to me in this article is that they had funds to do things that would never be available in the public school system. For example what the college counselors could do. What I see especially for those charters that can pull in kids from poorly performing areas, is that they can provide non-academic supports that make a huge difference. Sometimes this does not mean they have higher scores but they increase connections and opportunities that helps a group of highly motivated kids find a way out. We just had a family friend graduate from Wilson. He comes from a very poor family and has lots of needs, but they just could not help him in the way say KIPP probably could have.

Charters generally have less funds than DCPS but have more freedom on how to spend what they do get.

Yes, charters have more freedom to experiment with your children. Sometimes it works, and sometimes...

If you don't want something new and potentially untested, don't send your kid to a charter school. Talk about stating the obvious.

True--I don't and I won't. I can try new things with my child after school and on weekends. During school hours, I'll stick with what is tried and true. The stakes are too high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What stood out to me in this article is that they had funds to do things that would never be available in the public school system. For example what the college counselors could do. What I see especially for those charters that can pull in kids from poorly performing areas, is that they can provide non-academic supports that make a huge difference. Sometimes this does not mean they have higher scores but they increase connections and opportunities that helps a group of highly motivated kids find a way out. We just had a family friend graduate from Wilson. He comes from a very poor family and has lots of needs, but they just could not help him in the way say KIPP probably could have.

Charters generally have less funds than DCPS but have more freedom on how to spend what they do get.

Yes, charters have more freedom to experiment with your children. Sometimes it works, and sometimes...

If you don't want something new and potentially untested, don't send your kid to a charter school. Talk about stating the obvious.

True--I don't and I won't. I can try new things with my child after school and on weekends. During school hours, I'll stick with what is tried and true. The stakes are too high.

Just out of curiosity, which DCPS does your child attend?