BASIS DC will seek to expand to include K to 4th grade

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

BASIS DC is notorious for not providing IDEA-required supports for kids who could be successful there. I’d like to see them implement these improvements they mentioned before they get a chance to expand and then, oops! forget about those kids. Again.

And they should be required to fill open seats.

-1

Way too hard to catch kids up in the upper grades when DCPS is doing the exact opposite of BASIS: watering down the curriculum, solely focusing on closing the achievement gap, refusing to offer true honors classes, etc.

Way too easy to dismiss kids who could do the work. What’s your answer for kids coming in from other school districts? No chance at BASIS for you!

It is people like you who won't let them give placement tests. You made the bed. Now STFU and sleep in it.

Nice try. Go ahead with your placement tests. Plenty of kids could pass them. Maintain a waitlist for those who pass. If BASIS is so smart, they could figure out a way. But they don’t really want to. They like not having to backfill. And families like it too. Keeps those other kids out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

No one disagrees. Where you and I diverge is what it means to serve students in good faith. You seem to think it means watering down until every kid succeeds, and even then promoting anyway. I (and BASIS) think it means providing all available support but insisting that the minimum standard be met. "Counsel out" is a loaded term. If I tell you I think you are not going to succeed and you will not advance until you do, but you are welcome to stay and keep trying, that's being honest with you. I think many of the DC parents spent their entre lives being told how smart and pretty they were, such that they think any criticism or failure is someone else's fault. You've all taken that and cubed it with your own kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

BASIS DC is notorious for not providing IDEA-required supports for kids who could be successful there. I’d like to see them implement these improvements they mentioned before they get a chance to expand and then, oops! forget about those kids. Again.

And they should be required to fill open seats.

-1

Way too hard to catch kids up in the upper grades when DCPS is doing the exact opposite of BASIS: watering down the curriculum, solely focusing on closing the achievement gap, refusing to offer true honors classes, etc.

Way too easy to dismiss kids who could do the work. What’s your answer for kids coming in from other school districts? No chance at BASIS for you!

It is people like you who won't let them give placement tests. You made the bed. Now STFU and sleep in it.

Nice try. Go ahead with your placement tests. Plenty of kids could pass them. Maintain a waitlist for those who pass. If BASIS is so smart, they could figure out a way. But they don’t really want to. They like not having to backfill. And families like it too. Keeps those other kids out.

The Arizona schools make kids repeat more than one grade, often.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

BASIS DC is notorious for not providing IDEA-required supports for kids who could be successful there. I’d like to see them implement these improvements they mentioned before they get a chance to expand and then, oops! forget about those kids. Again.

And they should be required to fill open seats.

-1

Way too hard to catch kids up in the upper grades when DCPS is doing the exact opposite of BASIS: watering down the curriculum, solely focusing on closing the achievement gap, refusing to offer true honors classes, etc.

Way too easy to dismiss kids who could do the work. What’s your answer for kids coming in from other school districts? No chance at BASIS for you!

It is people like you who won't let them give placement tests. You made the bed. Now STFU and sleep in it.

Nice try. Go ahead with your placement tests. Plenty of kids could pass them. Maintain a waitlist for those who pass. If BASIS is so smart, they could figure out a way. But they don’t really want to. They like not having to backfill. And families like it too. Keeps those other kids out.

Take off the tin foil hat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

No one disagrees. Where you and I diverge is what it means to serve students in good faith. You seem to think it means watering down until every kid succeeds, and even then promoting anyway. I (and BASIS) think it means providing all available support but insisting that the minimum standard be met. "Counsel out" is a loaded term. If I tell you I think you are not going to succeed and you will not advance until you do, but you are welcome to stay and keep trying, that's being honest with you. I think many of the DC parents spent their entre lives being told how smart and pretty they were, such that they think any criticism or failure is someone else's fault. You've all taken that and cubed it with your own kids.

Can you describe to me what kind of student would be well-served by repeating more than one grade in elementary school? What academic or developmental problems does it address? Or does it create new problems, and hinder the child's development in other ways?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

BASIS DC is notorious for not providing IDEA-required supports for kids who could be successful there. I’d like to see them implement these improvements they mentioned before they get a chance to expand and then, oops! forget about those kids. Again.

And they should be required to fill open seats.

-1

Way too hard to catch kids up in the upper grades when DCPS is doing the exact opposite of BASIS: watering down the curriculum, solely focusing on closing the achievement gap, refusing to offer true honors classes, etc.

Way too easy to dismiss kids who could do the work. What’s your answer for kids coming in from other school districts? No chance at BASIS for you!

It is people like you who won't let them give placement tests. You made the bed. Now STFU and sleep in it.

Nice try. Go ahead with your placement tests. Plenty of kids could pass them. Maintain a waitlist for those who pass. If BASIS is so smart, they could figure out a way. But they don’t really want to. They like not having to backfill. And families like it too. Keeps those other kids out.

The Arizona schools make kids repeat more than one grade, often.

Elementary school kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

Regardless of whether this is legally true, it’s what the PCSB believes. They want to prove that charter schools can replace traditional public schools. Basis supporters love to hate DCPS, but Basis needs DCPS to take the students that Basis can’t or won’t educate.

Nope. But nice to know WTU has entered the chat!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

Regardless of whether this is legally true, it’s what the PCSB believes. They want to prove that charter schools can replace traditional public schools. Basis supporters love to hate DCPS, but Basis needs DCPS to take the students that Basis can’t or won’t educate.

Nope. But nice to know WTU has entered the chat!

What would BASIS be like if all schools had to take a proportionate share of students who move into DC from out of state? What would BASIS be like if all schools had to educate a proportionate share of students with high-level IEPs? Methinks BASIS' wonderful "success" wouldn't shine so bright.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

No one disagrees. Where you and I diverge is what it means to serve students in good faith. You seem to think it means watering down until every kid succeeds, and even then promoting anyway. I (and BASIS) think it means providing all available support but insisting that the minimum standard be met. "Counsel out" is a loaded term. If I tell you I think you are not going to succeed and you will not advance until you do, but you are welcome to stay and keep trying, that's being honest with you. I think many of the DC parents spent their entre lives being told how smart and pretty they were, such that they think any criticism or failure is someone else's fault. You've all taken that and cubed it with your own kids.

Can you describe to me what kind of student would be well-served by repeating more than one grade in elementary school? What academic or developmental problems does it address? Or does it create new problems, and hinder the child's development in other ways?

Can you describe to me what kind of other students would be well-served by having a disruptive kid 2 grade levels behind in their class for years on end? What academic or developmental needs of the other kids does it address? Or does it create new problems for the kids who are not 2+ grade levels behind and are capable of behaving in a classroom setting, and hinder all of the other children's academic growth in other ways?

This is the crux of the argument. All outcomes are suboptimal. You seem only to care about negative impact to the problems whereas I am focused on all the other kids who are punished by your approach. Plus, I understand that the kids who suffer from poor classroom management, disruptions and kids 2+ grade levels behind are disproportionately low-SES and POC. You talk a good game about ensuring the best possible education for all kids. My policies actually achieve highest net positive impact. And, yes, some kids suffer, but that's a better choice than making lots of kids suffer.

You also seek to limit this to discussion to ES. The problem with that is at some point those kids enter MS and HS years behind grade level. What do you do then, since you've set them up for failure? I have asked this over and over, but I will ask it again. What value to society and gainful employment does a "graduate" with a 4th grade education have to look forward to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

Regardless of whether this is legally true, it’s what the PCSB believes. They want to prove that charter schools can replace traditional public schools. Basis supporters love to hate DCPS, but Basis needs DCPS to take the students that Basis can’t or won’t educate.

Nope. But nice to know WTU has entered the chat!

What would BASIS be like if all schools had to take a proportionate share of students who move into DC from out of state? What would BASIS be like if all schools had to educate a proportionate share of students with high-level IEPs? Methinks BASIS' wonderful "success" wouldn't shine so bright.

Did you think this was witty or creative? That's true of Deal, Brent and every other school with demographic advantages. The difference in BASIS is a pure lottery. Any kid can be admitted, unlike Brent and JKLM. You pretend this is about the poor IEP kids and give lip service to POC, but that comment exposed you. Or are you suggesting that Brent and JKLM also have to take kids from all over DC? A lottery for all schools, perhaps?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

Regardless of whether this is legally true, it’s what the PCSB believes. They want to prove that charter schools can replace traditional public schools. Basis supporters love to hate DCPS, but Basis needs DCPS to take the students that Basis can’t or won’t educate.

Nope. But nice to know WTU has entered the chat!

What would BASIS be like if all schools had to take a proportionate share of students who move into DC from out of state? What would BASIS be like if all schools had to educate a proportionate share of students with high-level IEPs? Methinks BASIS' wonderful "success" wouldn't shine so bright.

Wait - now you are forcing kids with SN who can't handle the BASIS curriculum to attend to prove a point? Wow. That's some sincere concern for the kids you have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

Regardless of whether this is legally true, it’s what the PCSB believes. They want to prove that charter schools can replace traditional public schools. Basis supporters love to hate DCPS, but Basis needs DCPS to take the students that Basis can’t or won’t educate.

Nope. But nice to know WTU has entered the chat!

What would BASIS be like if all schools had to take a proportionate share of students who move into DC from out of state? What would BASIS be like if all schools had to educate a proportionate share of students with high-level IEPs? Methinks BASIS' wonderful "success" wouldn't shine so bright.

Did you think this was witty or creative? That's true of Deal, Brent and every other school with demographic advantages. The difference in BASIS is a pure lottery. Any kid can be admitted, unlike Brent and JKLM. You pretend this is about the poor IEP kids and give lip service to POC, but that comment exposed you. Or are you suggesting that Brent and JKLM also have to take kids from all over DC? A lottery for all schools, perhaps?

Those schools do have to take kids in all grades and all times of year. Unlike BASIS. It's not just that it's lottery, it's that they refuse to add new kids ever. And Deal, Brent, and other schools have to take IB kids with high-level IEPs as well, and offer self-contained classrooms, which BASIS also refuses to do. If you would like to view the DCPS self-contained classrooms list, you can see if here. https://dcpsspecialed.wixsite.com/home/self-contained-feeder-patterns

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

BASIS DC is notorious for not providing IDEA-required supports for kids who could be successful there. I’d like to see them implement these improvements they mentioned before they get a chance to expand and then, oops! forget about those kids. Again.

And they should be required to fill open seats.

-1

Way too hard to catch kids up in the upper grades when DCPS is doing the exact opposite of BASIS: watering down the curriculum, solely focusing on closing the achievement gap, refusing to offer true honors classes, etc.

Way too easy to dismiss kids who could do the work. What’s your answer for kids coming in from other school districts? No chance at BASIS for you!

It is people like you who won't let them give placement tests. You made the bed. Now STFU and sleep in it.

Nice try. Go ahead with your placement tests. Plenty of kids could pass them. Maintain a waitlist for those who pass. If BASIS is so smart, they could figure out a way. But they don’t really want to. They like not having to backfill. And families like it too. Keeps those other kids out.

The Arizona schools make kids repeat more than one grade, often.

Elementary school kids?

Yes. Those schools do backfill, but they have placement tests at every grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

No one disagrees. Where you and I diverge is what it means to serve students in good faith. You seem to think it means watering down until every kid succeeds, and even then promoting anyway. I (and BASIS) think it means providing all available support but insisting that the minimum standard be met. "Counsel out" is a loaded term. If I tell you I think you are not going to succeed and you will not advance until you do, but you are welcome to stay and keep trying, that's being honest with you. I think many of the DC parents spent their entre lives being told how smart and pretty they were, such that they think any criticism or failure is someone else's fault. You've all taken that and cubed it with your own kids.

Can you describe to me what kind of student would be well-served by repeating more than one grade in elementary school? What academic or developmental problems does it address? Or does it create new problems, and hinder the child's development in other ways?

Can you describe to me what kind of other students would be well-served by having a disruptive kid 2 grade levels behind in their class for years on end? What academic or developmental needs of the other kids does it address? Or does it create new problems for the kids who are not 2+ grade levels behind and are capable of behaving in a classroom setting, and hinder all of the other children's academic growth in other ways?

This is the crux of the argument. All outcomes are suboptimal. You seem only to care about negative impact to the problems whereas I am focused on all the other kids who are punished by your approach. Plus, I understand that the kids who suffer from poor classroom management, disruptions and kids 2+ grade levels behind are disproportionately low-SES and POC. You talk a good game about ensuring the best possible education for all kids. My policies actually achieve highest net positive impact. And, yes, some kids suffer, but that's a better choice than making lots of kids suffer.

You also seek to limit this to discussion to ES. The problem with that is at some point those kids enter MS and HS years behind grade level. What do you do then, since you've set them up for failure? I have asked this over and over, but I will ask it again. What value to society and gainful employment does a "graduate" with a 4th grade education have to look forward to?

Indeed, the needs of the students are not aligned. But I think with adequate services such as a 1:1 aide and push-in support, the situation could be manageable. Is BASIS unwilling to provide those services? In DCPS there's a Behavior and Emotional Support program for children who can't be placed in general education classrooms. I believe KIPP schools also provide self-contained classrooms. Is BASIS unwilling to do that?

The discussion is limited to ES because BASIS is seeking authorization for an ES. I understand that kids grow up and will enter MS below grade level, but I don't think their situation will be improved because they're older, or because they've been forced to spend time in a younger children's classroom. I see that they will struggle with competitive employment, but other types of employment could be available, and to say that there's no "value to society" is awfully harsh.

And I ask you again, what of a student who fails a BASIS test in one subject but is on grade level for other subjects. Should they be forced to repeat a grade? It seems a high price to pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the PP mentioned, students with special needs are indeed becoming a focus at BASIS because the school has recognized that it is this group of students which has the highest attrition (as opposed to a group based on race or low SES as people on DCUM seem to assume)

No, attrition of students with special needs is exactly what people assume is going on. Attrition on purpose.

Or attrition by choice. IDEA does not guarantee As in an accelerated curriculum. If a child’s SN makes it very hard for them to be successful in a rigorous environment then it’s normal that they would switch schools. Plenty of NT kids dislike the demands as well. Basis has to support the kids it has and implement the IEP, but does not have to water down the curriculm.

This is the money phrase. It is in the end what the argument is about. People who complain about high standards don't understand the difference between affording more time, and deciding that the material is too hard. Not the same thing.

No. It's because more time (which is a nice way of saying retention and forcing them into a classroom of younger kids even if not developmentally appropriate) doesn't necessarily solve anything, and it dramatically increases the long-term chances of the kid dropping out. The answer is more services, not more time.

You misunderstood. My reference to "more time" was to untimed testing vs watering down the material covered on the test. The former is a reasonable accommodation. The latter is how DCUM and lots of SJW misinterpret IDEA and other requirements.

You also keep using "developmentally appropriate" as if that's meaningful to anyone but you and your hardened opinion. Why do you care so much about the developmental appropriateness of the kids held back and not about them in classes 2-4 grades above their skills? I find that strange.

Because we're talking about an elementary school where the developmental and physical gaps can be really big. If a kid is held back more than once, that's a lot. If it were your kid, would you think this is a good plan? Or would you think the school is unwilling to meet their needs in a manner you consider appropriate? It's fine to say "BASIS isn't to everyone's taste" but to offer parents a choice of leaving or accepting an inappropriate class year placement is effectively pushing them out

I'll play. If my kid was to be held back 2x before 4th grade I would realize that the traditional school my kid was in was not going to prepare them to ever be independent or functioning members of society. I would want my kid in a school dedicated to getting them back on track.

But BASIS has an obligation to serve the needs of it's students in good faith. Public charters are not allowed to counsel out.

it’s not counseling out. it’s having standards and parents making a choice in light of them. this is no different from giving kids failing grades when they fail tests. what you really don’t like is the standards. (or you’re an ideological anti-charter person.)