School Budgets released-- ESY out

[Anonymous]

A number of those school having been planning to add prk class for a while. So, this isn't some new budgeting or whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Principals can request to add staff or reallocate which is why it should look at the submitted v proposed like the Pp suggested.

So it's principals that are choosing to mess with at-risk funds not central office correct

And it's principals that are choosing to change the Comprehensive Staffing Models and not central office correct

Principals can request to deviate from the CSM but it may or may not be approved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Principals can request to add staff or reallocate which is why it should look at the submitted v proposed like the Pp suggested.

So it's principals that are choosing to mess with at-risk funds not central office correct

And it's principals that are choosing to change the Comprehensive Staffing Models and not central office correct

At schools that I've had experience with, yes. The LSAT should (emphasis on should) be informed of these decisions and sign off that the principal has discussed with them. Not that they get any say, but the sign off of LSAT is a required budgeting procedure. Things do still change with savvy principals who know how to aggressively petition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Principals can request to add staff or reallocate which is why it should look at the submitted v proposed like the Pp suggested.

So it's principals that are choosing to mess with at-risk funds not central office correct

And it's principals that are choosing to change the Comprehensive Staffing Models and not central office correct

At schools that I've had experience with, yes. The LSAT should (emphasis on should) be informed of these decisions and sign off that the principal has discussed with them. Not that they get any say, but the sign off of LSAT is a required budgeting procedure. Things do still change with savvy principals who know how to aggressively petition.

Although I will say I don't know that the pot of at risk vs CSP is super clear. Looking at my school's budget last year and the at risk funding report it's not clear that the funds were used. I think the problem is the big pot of money is enough but take away the at risk and it's not enough money. They are masking what's covered by including it all together. (IMHO)

[Anonymous]

Wait- ESY? Per idea we must provide ESY services to students who will show a regression in critical skills.
Do you mean summer school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait- ESY? Per idea we must provide ESY services to students who will show a regression in critical skills.
Do you mean summer school?

Extended school year was the few schools that had 200 vs 180 days of school. Technically the extra long year is "Extended Year" and the special summer program is "Extended School Year." They are eliminating the 200-day program, not the summer program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait- ESY? Per idea we must provide ESY services to students who will show a regression in critical skills.
Do you mean summer school?

ESY for disabled students w/IEPs is still available.

But there were 10-11 schools that operated on an extended school year calendar for all students, adding about 4-5 weeks of instruction. That is what is being ended

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Re ESY, it seems like a good, data-driven decision.

Tried it, didn't work as hoped and had significant downsides (enrollment/teacher burnout and resistance) so they ended the program.

Not sure where you got the impression that it was a data-driven decision. The roll out was terrible- it was set up to fail by inept planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re ESY, it seems like a good, data-driven decision.

Tried it, didn't work as hoped and had significant downsides (enrollment/teacher burnout and resistance) so they ended the program.

Not sure where you got the impression that it was a data-driven decision. The roll out was terrible- it was set up to fail by inept planning.

the truth is the unions bitched about it and it got canned

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait- ESY? Per idea we must provide ESY services to students who will show a regression in critical skills.
Do you mean summer school?

Extended school year was the few schools that had 200 vs 180 days of school. Technically the extra long year is "Extended Year" and the special summer program is "Extended School Year." They are eliminating the 200-day program, not the summer program.

And what is the official reason to end the extended year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait- ESY? Per idea we must provide ESY services to students who will show a regression in critical skills.
Do you mean summer school?

Extended school year was the few schools that had 200 vs 180 days of school. Technically the extra long year is "Extended Year" and the special summer program is "Extended School Year." They are eliminating the 200-day program, not the summer program.

And what is the official reason to end the extended year?

There's at least three paragraphs explaining it in the article.

"But three years later, Bowser and acting D.C. Public Schools chancellor Lewis. D. Ferebee said attendance rates at these schools are poor, teacher burnout is high and academic improvements have been insignificant. The final extended academic year for schools in the traditional public school system will conclude this summer."

[Anonymous]

The teachers at the schools agreed to teach there. Back in 2013-2014 when it was first proposed teachers voted. Many schools voted against it and the schools that have it voted that they wanted the extra pay that came with the extra time. No one forced it down their throats.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re ESY, it seems like a good, data-driven decision.

Tried it, didn't work as hoped and had significant downsides (enrollment/teacher burnout and resistance) so they ended the program.

Not sure where you got the impression that it was a data-driven decision. The roll out was terrible- it was set up to fail by inept planning.

the truth is the unions bitched about it and it got canned

[Anonymous]

Everyone doesn't pay to access the WaPo online.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait- ESY? Per idea we must provide ESY services to students who will show a regression in critical skills.
Do you mean summer school?

Extended school year was the few schools that had 200 vs 180 days of school. Technically the extra long year is "Extended Year" and the special summer program is "Extended School Year." They are eliminating the 200-day program, not the summer program.

And what is the official reason to end the extended year?

There's at least three paragraphs explaining it in the article.

"But three years later, Bowser and acting D.C. Public Schools chancellor Lewis. D. Ferebee said attendance rates at these schools are poor, teacher burnout is high and academic improvements have been insignificant. The final extended academic year for schools in the traditional public school system will conclude this summer."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone doesn't pay to access the WaPo online.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait- ESY? Per idea we must provide ESY services to students who will show a regression in critical skills.
Do you mean summer school?

Extended school year was the few schools that had 200 vs 180 days of school. Technically the extra long year is "Extended Year" and the special summer program is "Extended School Year." They are eliminating the 200-day program, not the summer program.

And what is the official reason to end the extended year?

There's at least three paragraphs explaining it in the article.

"But three years later, Bowser and acting D.C. Public Schools chancellor Lewis. D. Ferebee said attendance rates at these schools are poor, teacher burnout is high and academic improvements have been insignificant. The final extended academic year for schools in the traditional public school system will conclude this summer."

That's what incognito mode is for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The teachers at the schools agreed to teach there. Back in 2013-2014 when it was first proposed teachers voted. Many schools voted against it and the schools that have it voted that they wanted the extra pay that came with the extra time. No one forced it down their throats.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re ESY, it seems like a good, data-driven decision.

Tried it, didn't work as hoped and had significant downsides (enrollment/teacher burnout and resistance) so they ended the program.

Not sure where you got the impression that it was a data-driven decision. The roll out was terrible- it was set up to fail by inept planning.

the truth is the unions bitched about it and it got canned

Not sure where you got your information. The teachers at the ESY schools found out when the public found out. Many teachers at those schools chose to leave because they didn’t like ESY.