Some Charter Myth Busting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What happens to a neighborhood school that has nore mid-year entries than was in their funding forecast?

They make it work.

These are inherent differences, baked into the law. There are also more options within all of DCPS -- alternative schools and the like -- for the truly hard, behavioral cases. The Ward 7 and 8 schools, both charter and DCPS, overall have the most movement.

Students with learning disabilities and economically disadvantaged students move the most. Much more data is here http://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/OSSE%20Mobility%20Report%20July%202015.pdf

So make the charters "make it work".

Charters still would have to go by their wait lists. So the 'problem' students aren't going to wind up there -- any more than they would wind up at an OOB DCPS or Banneker or SWW.

[Anonymous]

It would still be more fair than the current system. There is no reason a problem student can't be on a waitlist, and not all charters have waitlists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I want a list of high school and middle school arrests assigned to schools. When those are equalized across the system I'll start to believe some of the other stats. I still feel pretty confident the most disruptive, problematic students happen to exit PCS for DCPS and not the other way around.

What? Unless my advanced, zero-behavioral issue kid goes to a school with arrests, disruptions, and problematic students, you won't be happy?

This makes no sense. It's like DC people want their housing values to go down (attached to school options). If you want DC housing values to go up and school ratings to go up in DC, there has to be great (zero arrest, zero bullying, zero disruptions, zero problematic student) options in every single ward -- it can't just be for the so-called rich white people who can afford the deal/wilson boundary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I want a list of high school and middle school arrests assigned to schools. When those are equalized across the system I'll start to believe some of the other stats. I still feel pretty confident the most disruptive, problematic students happen to exit PCS for DCPS and not the other way around.

What? Unless my advanced, zero-behavioral issue kid goes to a school with arrests, disruptions, and problematic students, you won't be happy?

This makes no sense. It's like DC people want their housing values to go down (attached to school options). If you want DC housing values to go up and school ratings to go up in DC, there has to be great (zero arrest, zero bullying, zero disruptions, zero problematic student) options in every single ward -- it can't just be for the so-called rich white people who can afford the deal/wilson boundary.

Sorry but public schools cannot guarantee "zero problematic students."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would still be more fair than the current system. There is no reason a problem student can't be on a waitlist, and not all charters have waitlists.

Problem students are on wait lists all over. But they shouldn't jump to the top of the wait list, which is what some are saying they want to have happen.

In the meantime, they have the right to go to their IB school. Just like every other kid in the city.

[Anonymous]

It's not just problem students. Charters not back-filling is a real issue for people who move to DC after the lottery, military and otherwise.

When kids leave a charter and there's an opening in the classroom and the school just refuses to take any more kids, it's bad for the kid (and if the family has the wherewithal to move into a popular school boundary, bad for the overcrowded DCPS school too). I fully agree that charters should have to backfill in accordance with their waitlists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What happens to a neighborhood school that has nore mid-year entries than was in their funding forecast?

They make it work.

These are inherent differences, baked into the law. There are also more options within all of DCPS -- alternative schools and the like -- for the truly hard, behavioral cases. The Ward 7 and 8 schools, both charter and DCPS, overall have the most movement.

Students with learning disabilities and economically disadvantaged students move the most. Much more data is here http://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/OSSE%20Mobility%20Report%20July%202015.pdf

So make the charters "make it work".

Of course the DCPS schools get 'extra' funding if the projected number of students doesn't materialize. That scenario can never happen at a charter.

[Anonymous]

And if you look at the # of Spec Ed students who are Level 1 (need little extra assistance) vs. those that are 3-4 (require a half- full-time person aide)...I think you'll find that DCPS has most of the latter and the charters a lot more of the former.

#counseledout

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not just problem students. Charters not back-filling is a real issue for people who move to DC after the lottery, military and otherwise.

When kids leave a charter and there's an opening in the classroom and the school just refuses to take any more kids, it's bad for the kid (and if the family has the wherewithal to move into a popular school boundary, bad for the overcrowded DCPS school too). I fully agree that charters should have to backfill in accordance with their waitlists.

It's so ridiculous. We have DD4 in PK3 at a HRCS and DD7 is high on the waitlist as a sibling. If a spot opened up, I don't even know if they would backfill. Because apparently letting in the sibling of a current student would wreck their oh so special culture. Of course, DD7 will likely get in next year anyway. Why it's better for the culture to make her wait, I do not know. It's total BS! My dropoff commute sucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not just problem students. Charters not back-filling is a real issue for people who move to DC after the lottery, military and otherwise.

When kids leave a charter and there's an opening in the classroom and the school just refuses to take any more kids, it's bad for the kid (and if the family has the wherewithal to move into a popular school boundary, bad for the overcrowded DCPS school too). I fully agree that charters should have to backfill in accordance with their waitlists.

It's so ridiculous. We have DD4 in PK3 at a HRCS and DD7 is high on the waitlist as a sibling. If a spot opened up, I don't even know if they would backfill. Because apparently letting in the sibling of a current student would wreck their oh so special culture. Of course, DD7 will likely get in next year anyway. Why it's better for the culture to make her wait, I do not know. It's total BS! My dropoff commute sucks.

That sucks. Maybe you should ask the principle and find out whether they would admit her mid-year. Otherwise, maybe look elsewhere because your school sucks, highly regarded or otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And if you look at the # of Spec Ed students who are Level 1 (need little extra assistance) vs. those that are 3-4 (require a half- full-time person aide)...I think you'll find that DCPS has most of the latter and the charters a lot more of the former.

#counseledout

Or #self-contained classrooms. #Betterforthosekids

[Anonymous]

Having worked at a charter school for years as an administrator (back in the classroom in Virginia as a teacher because I had it with the corruption in the system), I can attest to a few things. First, charters absolutely skim off the "top" of a population because we pull from families who care enough and are knowledgeable enough and have the times and means to navigate the system. That said, we absolute got behavior cases, most of whom did eventually end up being counseled out of the school. What killed me about working in a charter was the short-cuts and lack of fairness we gave special needs children. We didn't have the resources to support an IEP, we just stonewalled and made the process as difficult as possible before the parent either took their kid elsewhere or caved and accepted subpar services. We did this because we didn't have a choice -- our management made it clear that if we went out of bounds in terms of budget, etc. we were fired. And people were fired constantly.

The other thing I found frustrating was the teachers. They mostly meant well, but they were untrained, didn't have classroom management skills, and they would get overwhelmed and quit. I was constantly trying to hire teachers because people would just walk off the job. I imagine the average tenure was about two years at the school I worked in (basically long enough for someone to either run off to law school or get certified and leave to teach in Maryland and Virginia). Also, charter performance is massively overrated. Compared to DCPS, sure, they are better than most. Compared to the poorest Title I in Montgomery or Fairfax counties? They are a million times worse.

Anyway, I ended up leaving because I couldn't stand by ethically and let the bottom line screw kids. But I get why charters exist, I've seen OSSE and DCPS nonsense first hand. I just think it's a shame that the title I school I work in now (in FCPS) is giving kids a million more resources and better tools to learn than the "massively successful" charter I worked in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having worked at a charter school for years as an administrator (back in the classroom in Virginia as a teacher because I had it with the corruption in the system), I can attest to a few things. First, charters absolutely skim off the "top" of a population because we pull from families who care enough and are knowledgeable enough and have the times and means to navigate the system. That said, we absolute got behavior cases, most of whom did eventually end up being counseled out of the school. What killed me about working in a charter was the short-cuts and lack of fairness we gave special needs children. We didn't have the resources to support an IEP, we just stonewalled and made the process as difficult as possible before the parent either took their kid elsewhere or caved and accepted subpar services. We did this because we didn't have a choice -- our management made it clear that if we went out of bounds in terms of budget, etc. we were fired. And people were fired constantly.

The other thing I found frustrating was the teachers. They mostly meant well, but they were untrained, didn't have classroom management skills, and they would get overwhelmed and quit. I was constantly trying to hire teachers because people would just walk off the job. I imagine the average tenure was about two years at the school I worked in (basically long enough for someone to either run off to law school or get certified and leave to teach in Maryland and Virginia). Also, charter performance is massively overrated. Compared to DCPS, sure, they are better than most. Compared to the poorest Title I in Montgomery or Fairfax counties? They are a million times worse.

Anyway, I ended up leaving because I couldn't stand by ethically and let the bottom line screw kids. But I get why charters exist, I've seen OSSE and DCPS nonsense first hand. I just think it's a shame that the title I school I work in now (in FCPS) is giving kids a million more resources and better tools to learn than the "massively successful" charter I worked in.

Thank you for your insightful post, PP.

[Anonymous]

Here's a proposal: OSSE could disburse funds to charter schools monthly, based on the school's enrollment on a fixed day the previous month.

"Count day" would become a monthly event. However, only one or two count days a year would involve a site visit and audit by OSSE staff. Most count days would simply entail filing an official school roster with OSSE with civil, and perhaps criminal, penalties for fraudulent filings.

Charter schools would then try harder to retain students and would certainly think twice before counseling anyone to leave. If a student were to leave mid-year the charter would lose that student's funding within a month and for the remainder of the year, unless the charter had students on a wait list from which to back-fill.

An approach such as this one would make it difficult to for charters to succeed using high-attrition strategies, but that is probably a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having worked at a charter school for years as an administrator (back in the classroom in Virginia as a teacher because I had it with the corruption in the system), I can attest to a few things. First, charters absolutely skim off the "top" of a population because we pull from families who care enough and are knowledgeable enough and have the times and means to navigate the system. That said, we absolute got behavior cases, most of whom did eventually end up being counseled out of the school. What killed me about working in a charter was the short-cuts and lack of fairness we gave special needs children. We didn't have the resources to support an IEP, we just stonewalled and made the process as difficult as possible before the parent either took their kid elsewhere or caved and accepted subpar services. We did this because we didn't have a choice -- our management made it clear that if we went out of bounds in terms of budget, etc. we were fired. And people were fired constantly.

The other thing I found frustrating was the teachers. They mostly meant well, but they were untrained, didn't have classroom management skills, and they would get overwhelmed and quit. I was constantly trying to hire teachers because people would just walk off the job. I imagine the average tenure was about two years at the school I worked in (basically long enough for someone to either run off to law school or get certified and leave to teach in Maryland and Virginia). Also, charter performance is massively overrated. Compared to DCPS, sure, they are better than most. Compared to the poorest Title I in Montgomery or Fairfax counties? They are a million times worse.

Anyway, I ended up leaving because I couldn't stand by ethically and let the bottom line screw kids. But I get why charters exist, I've seen OSSE and DCPS nonsense first hand. I just think it's a shame that the title I school I work in now (in FCPS) is giving kids a million more resources and better tools to learn than the "massively successful" charter I worked in.

Thank you for sharing. I taught in a charter in DC and now teach in a Title I school in DCPS. I had a very similar experience in my charter school.

As an interesting note, KIPP opened a "Learning Center" two years ago under the guise of providing services for special needs students, but it's mostly a place to send kids with behavior problems so they don't have to expel them and report those numbers.