JLG vs McDuffie on public schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The business establishment isn’t backing him because they like Duff’s smile.
DC’s entire business and real estate lobby has consolidated behind McDuffie.
Opportunity DC, a super PAC backed by real estate executives and large donors, spent heavily to elect him to the at-large seat in 2022, unseating the progressive incumbent Elissa Silverman.

These groups don’t back candidates out of civic spirit. They back candidates they believe will govern in their interest. When the chain restaurants lobby, the real estate lobby, and the business establishment all line up behind the same person, the reasonable question is: who is he going to govern for?

How do you not understand that this EXACTLY the criticism of JLG being made in this thread regarding her adherence to WTU dogma? And also the people who defend McDuffie's business ties do so in the exact same way that people defend JLG's special interest relationships. They'll say "well, what's wrong with business and real estate? don't we want the city to be friendly to business interests in order to encourage economic development that leads to jobs, tax dollars, and more civic spirit?" And yes, there's cynicism in this argument but there is also truth -- I do actually want a mayor who will seek to advance economic investment in the city, and who will make the city more attractive to (gasp!) real estate developers and businesses of all size who are willing to put money into the city, hire people, and make this a good place to live.

I don't like Kenyon McDuffie, but this cynical argument is actually more compelling to me than the idea that JLG will magically be better on education because she sits in the back pocket of a teachers union that I can assure you has not always worked in the best interests of my kids or my family.

I'm confused as to why you think a teachers union is set up to work for the best interest of YOUR kids and family. A teachers union is in place to advocate for labor rights for educators- such as negotiating salaries, improving work environments for them, etc. Secondly, are you that narcissistic to believe that everything should always work in the favor of your kids and your family? That's not the way life works- the world doesn't revolve around you and you don't get what you want 100% of the time. This is what it means to live in a community.

NP but that PP doesn't think that the WTU exists to serve their kids' best interests - that's their point. So people in this thread repeatedly screaming "YOU HATE TEACHERS" if anyone pushes back against the WTU's positions are very, very dumb. Teachers are entitled to a union that supports their labor rights, but they're not entitled to anyone who has other priorities being demonized because the teachers union is not their moral compass.

PP here and yes, exactly. It's the job of the WTU to advocate for its members. But it's the job of the mayor to advocate for all constituents, not just teachers. Not all DCPS teachers are even DC residents. I don't want the mayor and the teacher's union to be completely unified on school issues, that doesn't make sense. Of course WTU should exist and advocate as it sees fit. I want a voice too, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://capitalcommonsense.substack.com/p/im-a-dcps-parent-janeese-lewis-georges

"I'm a DCPS Parent. Here's Why Janeese Lewis George's Big Education Plan Worries Me."

"The problem is that, for seemingly well-meaning but misguided reasons, Lewis George is planning to dismantle successful education reforms that have helped the District achieve more than a decade of progress on math and reading. Above all, she has said she wants to “end” IMPACT, the pay-for-performance system in place since 2009 that rewards our best teachers with large bonuses while cutting loose our worst.

Lewis George has only offered a fuzzy outline of how she’d replace today’s system. But her public statements suggest we could wind up with a weaker alternative that puts less emphasis on concrete measures of student success."

My guess is that the author is in the room with us.

Just like anyone who cares about education in DC should be able to see the pros and cons of charters, they should also be able to see the pros and cons of IMPACT. It is completely possible we have extracted all the gains we are going to achieve, as an education system, from IMPACT and now it is time to think about doing something different. At some point, IMAPCT itself becomes too much the focus of educators — from central office to the classroom — and we need to refocus on what is happening with our kids and how much they are learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you enjoy having your kid attend only 4 days a week and half days, then JLG is your #1 choice. Janeese is all in for "flexible scheduling". So what is flexible scheduling, you might ask? Get ready for more asynchronous days, 3-day weekends, 4-day weekends, tech days, packet days, enrichment days, independent learning days, camp days, early dismissal days, rotating drop-off days, and teacher office-hours-only days, with fewer actual normal days.

https://www.weareempowered.org/flexiblescheduling.html


https://www.weareempowered.org/uploads/2/6/1/...ling_for_schools.pdf

She also filled out a questionnaire saying she thinks teachers need more professional development days. What? These kids are never in class. I want more classtime, not less.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cannot vote for any candidate endorsed by the WTU.

So you hate teachers then?

NP. I hate the WTU. I think they are crooked. They are a detriment to our kids' education. I also love teachers.

If you can't differentiate between teachers and the WTU then...you probably collect a paycheck from the WTU.

Teachers are the WTU. So yes you hate teachers.

The self delusion of some people is really astonishing. To claim you don’t hate teachers but hate the WTU is not only wild, but completely divorced from reality. WTU represents 90-95% of DCPS teachers, so if said person is claiming they hate WTU, they definitely hate public school teachers at the very least.

This
This 100 percent. When posters say they hate the union, they mean they want the right to treat teachers like their servants, hover over them like the Gestapo, interfere with their ability to do their jobs, judge them for being successful or failing at what they do notwithstanding that they themselves are no more qualified to judge then vice-versa, and fire them at will. They want the right to be adverse to teachers and not to work in tandem with that. And that means they hate teachers, and that the WTU is necessary to protect teachers from their haters.

Even union people hate teachers unions. Them and police unions are the worst. I remember how the WTU cynically turned the pandemic into the world's longest paid vacation. Our kids are still paying the price.

Why is everyone talking as if DC was the only major city to go remote for so long? It wasn't by a long shot.

And the people who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 were freedom fighters, right?

Please explain how that analogy makes any sense whatsoever.

Rewriting history that we all lived through. You're not fooling anyone. You just look like a huge liar.

I'm not re-writing history at all. I agree that in retrospect schools should have and could have opened earlier and that kids were hurt and still are by the decision.

But hindsight is 20/20, WTU wasn't the only union to make that mistake, and it's unfair and says a lot about you if you really think the WTU took the position that it did because "teachers didn't want to work." That just means you really do hate teachers.

Yes, except there were people who were advocating for schools to reopen at the time. And people were acting like it was heresy to even suggest it, and that if you did suggest it at the time you were told that you wanted teachers to die. Remember how people treated Emily Oster when she said Schools needed to reopen?

This. I think a lot of people think we can all just memory-hole everything that happened during Covid and pretend like no one is accountable for any of their behavior during that time. But especially during elections, I remember. JLG is choosing to tie herself very tightly to WTU, whose current leadership engaged in a campaign of bullying and shaming any parents who supported reasonable, science-based return to classrooms (including part-time returns, outdoor classes, and other suggestions aimed at keeping everyone safe while also meeting the needs of kids). I'm not going to forget that. WTU's decision to elect this particular leadership was frankly disturbing to me, and sent the message that the union was doubling down on their Covid positions. That's a hard no for me and makes me skeptical of JLG even though I have no love at all for McDuffie as a longtime Ward 5 resident who knows exactly what he is.

I won't be excited about our next mayor no matter what, at this point it's a question of minimizing negatives. JLG's position on schools and relationships with the WTU is a big negative for me.

Go ahead and tell me that means I hate teachers or makes me a bad person. It's the same thing you told me in 2020 and 2021. I'm over it. I know who I am and what my values are.

You must be exhausted.

I wonder if you think responding over and over in this non-substantive, trolling way is compelling. It's not. Here's a substantive post talking about objections to both WTU and JLG's adherence to their dogma. Rather than engaging it and refuting it, you troll. This indicates you don't have meaningful responses. Do you think that will be compelling to someone who has thought deeply about these issues?

It seems telling that, rather than allow people to discuss and debate and (gasp!) maybe even criticize JLG's record on schools, her campaign tries to shout everyone down by spamming the thread with completely irrelevant (and, frankly, kooky) attacks on McDuffie that aren't even on topic. What are they afraid of?

It's also weird that all these wildly off-topic posts aren't being deleted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mayor Bowser has “always supported” Kenyan McDuffie, she told Axios, stopping just short of a formal endorsement only because she says she’s “stepping off the political stage.”

Opportunity DC, which backed Bowser for years and helped elect McDuffie in 2022, has continued spending in this race cycle.
Bowser’s approval rating fell below 50% for the first time during her tenure. Her legacy is defined by DC’s affordability crisis, chronic absenteeism in schools, an underfunded social safety net, and a cozy relationship with the city’s real estate and business class.

You can scream all you want that it’s taking away from talking about JLG. In that case state that you don’t support McDuffie explicitly because it just makes it look like you are desperately trying to discredit her and distract. very Trump.

I will.probably vite for jlg, but you cant make chronic absteneeism bower"s problem. It came from school shut downs in the psndemic and bowser fought harder thsn anyone to open schools. Let jlc try to fix the problem her beloved wtu created.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The business establishment isn’t backing him because they like Duff’s smile.
DC’s entire business and real estate lobby has consolidated behind McDuffie.
Opportunity DC, a super PAC backed by real estate executives and large donors, spent heavily to elect him to the at-large seat in 2022, unseating the progressive incumbent Elissa Silverman.

These groups don’t back candidates out of civic spirit. They back candidates they believe will govern in their interest. When the chain restaurants lobby, the real estate lobby, and the business establishment all line up behind the same person, the reasonable question is: who is he going to govern for?

How do you not understand that this EXACTLY the criticism of JLG being made in this thread regarding her adherence to WTU dogma? And also the people who defend McDuffie's business ties do so in the exact same way that people defend JLG's special interest relationships. They'll say "well, what's wrong with business and real estate? don't we want the city to be friendly to business interests in order to encourage economic development that leads to jobs, tax dollars, and more civic spirit?" And yes, there's cynicism in this argument but there is also truth -- I do actually want a mayor who will seek to advance economic investment in the city, and who will make the city more attractive to (gasp!) real estate developers and businesses of all size who are willing to put money into the city, hire people, and make this a good place to live.

I don't like Kenyon McDuffie, but this cynical argument is actually more compelling to me than the idea that JLG will magically be better on education because she sits in the back pocket of a teachers union that I can assure you has not always worked in the best interests of my kids or my family.

I'm confused as to why you think a teachers union is set up to work for the best interest of YOUR kids and family. A teachers union is in place to advocate for labor rights for educators- such as negotiating salaries, improving work environments for them, etc. Secondly, are you that narcissistic to believe that everything should always work in the favor of your kids and your family? That's not the way life works- the world doesn't revolve around you and you don't get what you want 100% of the time. This is what it means to live in a community.

NP but that PP doesn't think that the WTU exists to serve their kids' best interests - that's their point. So people in this thread repeatedly screaming "YOU HATE TEACHERS" if anyone pushes back against the WTU's positions are very, very dumb. Teachers are entitled to a union that supports their labor rights, but they're not entitled to anyone who has other priorities being demonized because the teachers union is not their moral compass.

PP here and yes, exactly. It's the job of the WTU to advocate for its members. But it's the job of the mayor to advocate for all constituents, not just teachers. Not all DCPS teachers are even DC residents. I don't want the mayor and the teacher's union to be completely unified on school issues, that doesn't make sense. Of course WTU should exist and advocate as it sees fit. I want a voice too, though.

Parents and kids will have zero say in schools if JLG is elected. You can't have a mayor who is backing WTU 100 percent of the time. Sometimes their interests do not align with anyone else's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The business establishment isn’t backing him because they like Duff’s smile.
DC’s entire business and real estate lobby has consolidated behind McDuffie.
Opportunity DC, a super PAC backed by real estate executives and large donors, spent heavily to elect him to the at-large seat in 2022, unseating the progressive incumbent Elissa Silverman.

These groups don’t back candidates out of civic spirit. They back candidates they believe will govern in their interest. When the chain restaurants lobby, the real estate lobby, and the business establishment all line up behind the same person, the reasonable question is: who is he going to govern for?

How do you not understand that this EXACTLY the criticism of JLG being made in this thread regarding her adherence to WTU dogma? And also the people who defend McDuffie's business ties do so in the exact same way that people defend JLG's special interest relationships. They'll say "well, what's wrong with business and real estate? don't we want the city to be friendly to business interests in order to encourage economic development that leads to jobs, tax dollars, and more civic spirit?" And yes, there's cynicism in this argument but there is also truth -- I do actually want a mayor who will seek to advance economic investment in the city, and who will make the city more attractive to (gasp!) real estate developers and businesses of all size who are willing to put money into the city, hire people, and make this a good place to live.

I don't like Kenyon McDuffie, but this cynical argument is actually more compelling to me than the idea that JLG will magically be better on education because she sits in the back pocket of a teachers union that I can assure you has not always worked in the best interests of my kids or my family.

I'm confused as to why you think a teachers union is set up to work for the best interest of YOUR kids and family. A teachers union is in place to advocate for labor rights for educators- such as negotiating salaries, improving work environments for them, etc. Secondly, are you that narcissistic to believe that everything should always work in the favor of your kids and your family? That's not the way life works- the world doesn't revolve around you and you don't get what you want 100% of the time. This is what it means to live in a community.

NP but that PP doesn't think that the WTU exists to serve their kids' best interests - that's their point. So people in this thread repeatedly screaming "YOU HATE TEACHERS" if anyone pushes back against the WTU's positions are very, very dumb. Teachers are entitled to a union that supports their labor rights, but they're not entitled to anyone who has other priorities being demonized because the teachers union is not their moral compass.

PP here and yes, exactly. It's the job of the WTU to advocate for its members. But it's the job of the mayor to advocate for all constituents, not just teachers. Not all DCPS teachers are even DC residents. I don't want the mayor and the teacher's union to be completely unified on school issues, that doesn't make sense. Of course WTU should exist and advocate as it sees fit. I want a voice too, though.

Parents and kids will have zero say in schools if JLG is elected. You can't have a mayor who is backing WTU 100 percent of the time. Sometimes their interests do not align with anyone else's.

I just read through her WTU questionaire : https://assets.nationbuilder.com/wtulocal6action/pages/3903/attachments/original/1767889885/2026_Mayor_-_Janeese_Lewis_George-2.pdf?1767889885

And I cannot vote for her. She wants to "ease credentialing" to become a teacher, get rid of IMPACT, and has open hostility towards charters. I'm currently a charter and DCPS parent of high achieving kids. There is absolutely nothing in her plan for kids like mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of her signature issues is promoting the use of computers in the classroom. If you think there's not enough screentime at school, she's your candidate.

This is the type of fear mongering I’m referring to and find very off putting.

What are you talking about? It's not fear mongering to point to a candidate's record. It's her legislation. It's called the "DCPS Digital Equity Act."

https://lims.dccouncil.gov/Legislation/B24-0077?link_id=26&can_id=04f23ec4cad604f0b31c65dd8e74788c&source=email-ward-4-dispatch-council-is-back-in-session-and-neighborhood-safety-updates&email_referrer=&email_subject=ward-4-dispatch-tech-equity-in-dcps-fall-fun-fest-and-art-all-night-tonight

She brags about it on her web site.

"Her first bill as a Councilmember was to call for the creation of a multi-year technology plan for DCPS, so that students have the digital literacy skills they need to succeed, and our schools have the equipment and staffing to support 21st century learning."

Omg - ha! I actually went and read the introduction to that legislation — it basically calls for equitable access to technology and review processes to make sure it’s being used effectively. You just proved my point about the fear mongering!

Two things I wanted to comment on. I am all for curtailing the use of technology and making sure there is a balance with how we use it, but this idea that using the word technology and anything about computers is a four letter word is also not helpful. These extreme all or nothing kind of arguments are what keep us from getting anything accomplished.
Part of the push for equitable access to technology is because regardless of how much you use a computer in the classroom, if you don’t have access to a computer at home to do research or write a paper it really sets you up for a disadvantage. Not sure where all of your kids go to school, but a lot of schools across the city they open up computer labs outside of school hours for kids to use.

Second, I agree that JLG is way more responsive to the actual people that live in DC and does her best to bring their concerns back to council. Which goes a long way for me.

I've been one of her constituents during her entire career, and this JLG you describe is completely foreign to me. I've found her to be arrogant, unresponsive and pretty unlikeable. If you disagree with her on anything, she treats you like you're her enemy. All politicians are extra nice to everybody right before an election, but she'll revert to who she really is after the voting is over.

This is the same for me. I am one of her W4 constituents and I could have written this. And I can't think of anything substantial she has accomplished for our Ward. Plus I am a charter school parent and her stance on them is enough for me to stay away.

[Anonymous]

New poster here. As a charter school parent and DCPS parent looking for someone to vote for, I've been disappointed with Janeese Lewis George so far.

At the DC Council meeting yesterday, Councilmembers discussed funding for charter school students. Mayor Bowser's current budget short-changes charter school students by allocating a lot less money per student for charter students compared to DCPS students. I was disappointed that JLG did not speak up to advocate for fair funding for charter school students at the DC Council. That was literally the topic of discussion, and JLG stayed silent. CMs Mendelson, Pinto, Parker, Crawford, and Felder all spoke up in favor of fair funding for charter school students and said more money needs to be allocated to fill the funding equity gap than what the DC Council allocated yesterday.

Also, JLG and her office have not responded to constituents who have reached out to ask her to support equal funding for charter school students. My guess is that she is so concerned about what the WTU thinks that she is not fully considering the needs of charter school families -- even though charter school students make up almost half of all public school students in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She hates charters with a passion and supports a plan their funding by $9k+ per child.

I think it’s true that JLG as a mayor will negatively impact charters. There is a constituency of Ward 4 and 5 parents plus WTU who believe that charters are now threatening the progress that DCPS has made. They are smart enough to mostly keep their opinions off this message board, but they want EOTP students who are peeling off for the “good” charters to be rerouted into Wells, Coolidge, etc. They’re probably right, but it’s too
soon to unwind the charter school system in DC. And I say this as a gung ho DCPS parent, “low standards” and all.

OK but you cite no evidence other than “I think.”

Just more garbage posting.

JLG is very clear that she does not like charters. It’s fair to say, “I don’t think she can do that much damage to them, and I overall prefer her/her policies to McDuffie and will therefore still vote for her.” Fine. Perfectly legit stance. But pretending that she’s not actually and actively hostile to charters is delulu.

I’m a single issue voter (education) and very much in favor of charters so I really want to run this down. I’m also relatively new to DC politics so forgive my ignorance… What’s the evidence for the view that she’s hostile to charters?

My advice is to vote Lewis George. Neither Kenyan nor Janeese is going to make any serious changes to the charter system, it’s not worth it. Even if either of them have ever voiced skepticism about charters, I think that just shows they have a working brain; even if you are very pro-charter, a thoughtful person can see the pros and cons of having a large chunk of students and funding going to charter schools. What’s much more likely to happen is a focus on DCPS — that is what the mayor has true control over. McDuffie has largely seemed disinterested in DCPS throughout his career. I think it’s time to breathe some new life into DCPS (especially around truancy and middle school issues), and so I don’t think it’s the right time to have an education indifferent mayor. Lewis George has been engaged in a thoughtful way and I think she will continue to do so. I also don’t think she will be beholden to the union, because mayors have a lot of control to do innovative things with DCPS with or without the union. I personally don’t love or hate the WTU. I think she will get along fairly well with them, and that could be an advantage for improving schools — it’s easier to get big ideas done if the union and school leaders aren’t at odds.

But she is beholden to the union and hasn't hidden the union or socialist democrat ties. She is considering for top education positions anti-charter, union forward, picks. I don't mind union supportive picks but those being considered by JLG are intensely anti-charter.

Where are you getting this info? Genuinely curious who those picks are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New poster here. As a charter school parent and DCPS parent looking for someone to vote for, I've been disappointed with Janeese Lewis George so far.

At the DC Council meeting yesterday, Councilmembers discussed funding for charter school students. Mayor Bowser's current budget short-changes charter school students by allocating a lot less money per student for charter students compared to DCPS students. I was disappointed that JLG did not speak up to advocate for fair funding for charter school students at the DC Council. That was literally the topic of discussion, and JLG stayed silent. CMs Mendelson, Pinto, Parker, Crawford, and Felder all spoke up in favor of fair funding for charter school students and said more money needs to be allocated to fill the funding equity gap than what the DC Council allocated yesterday.

Also, JLG and her office have not responded to constituents who have reached out to ask her to support equal funding for charter school students. My guess is that she is so concerned about what the WTU thinks that she is not fully considering the needs of charter school families -- even though charter school students make up almost half of all public school students in DC.

100 percent this. But in addition to supporting the WTU no matter what, I think in her heart she dislikes charters. Whenever she has to say the word you can feel it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's already a thread.

And Gary Goodweather is better than JLG or private-school McDuffie.

+1

From the little I have read about GG, I am interested. And would love to have an alternative to the two leading candidates - what a disheartening choice. I haven't done my due diligence yet on GG and would like to hear what you like about his education policies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The business establishment isn’t backing him because they like Duff’s smile.
DC’s entire business and real estate lobby has consolidated behind McDuffie.
Opportunity DC, a super PAC backed by real estate executives and large donors, spent heavily to elect him to the at-large seat in 2022, unseating the progressive incumbent Elissa Silverman.

These groups don’t back candidates out of civic spirit. They back candidates they believe will govern in their interest. When the chain restaurants lobby, the real estate lobby, and the business establishment all line up behind the same person, the reasonable question is: who is he going to govern for?

How do you not understand that this EXACTLY the criticism of JLG being made in this thread regarding her adherence to WTU dogma? And also the people who defend McDuffie's business ties do so in the exact same way that people defend JLG's special interest relationships. They'll say "well, what's wrong with business and real estate? don't we want the city to be friendly to business interests in order to encourage economic development that leads to jobs, tax dollars, and more civic spirit?" And yes, there's cynicism in this argument but there is also truth -- I do actually want a mayor who will seek to advance economic investment in the city, and who will make the city more attractive to (gasp!) real estate developers and businesses of all size who are willing to put money into the city, hire people, and make this a good place to live.

I don't like Kenyon McDuffie, but this cynical argument is actually more compelling to me than the idea that JLG will magically be better on education because she sits in the back pocket of a teachers union that I can assure you has not always worked in the best interests of my kids or my family.

I'm confused as to why you think a teachers union is set up to work for the best interest of YOUR kids and family. A teachers union is in place to advocate for labor rights for educators- such as negotiating salaries, improving work environments for them, etc. Secondly, are you that narcissistic to believe that everything should always work in the favor of your kids and your family? That's not the way life works- the world doesn't revolve around you and you don't get what you want 100% of the time. This is what it means to live in a community.

NP but that PP doesn't think that the WTU exists to serve their kids' best interests - that's their point. So people in this thread repeatedly screaming "YOU HATE TEACHERS" if anyone pushes back against the WTU's positions are very, very dumb. Teachers are entitled to a union that supports their labor rights, but they're not entitled to anyone who has other priorities being demonized because the teachers union is not their moral compass.

PP here and yes, exactly. It's the job of the WTU to advocate for its members. But it's the job of the mayor to advocate for all constituents, not just teachers. Not all DCPS teachers are even DC residents. I don't want the mayor and the teacher's union to be completely unified on school issues, that doesn't make sense. Of course WTU should exist and advocate as it sees fit. I want a voice too, though.

Parents and kids will have zero say in schools if JLG is elected. You can't have a mayor who is backing WTU 100 percent of the time. Sometimes their interests do not align with anyone else's.

If JLG is elected, WTU will demand next year that school ends every Wednesday at noon (early release on Wednesday is a growing and ugly trend). They'll say teachers need time to plan or recharge or whatever. Who will say no to them if not the mayor? JLG will never say no to the union.

[Anonymous]

sadly, I am pretty sure not a single Mayoral candidate has addressed charters or higher achieving kids in any of their statements. It's just not how you win elections here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://capitalcommonsense.substack.com/p/im-a-dcps-parent-janeese-lewis-georges

"I'm a DCPS Parent. Here's Why Janeese Lewis George's Big Education Plan Worries Me."

"The problem is that, for seemingly well-meaning but misguided reasons, Lewis George is planning to dismantle successful education reforms that have helped the District achieve more than a decade of progress on math and reading. Above all, she has said she wants to “end” IMPACT, the pay-for-performance system in place since 2009 that rewards our best teachers with large bonuses while cutting loose our worst.

Lewis George has only offered a fuzzy outline of how she’d replace today’s system. But her public statements suggest we could wind up with a weaker alternative that puts less emphasis on concrete measures of student success."

My guess is that the author is in the room with us.

Just like anyone who cares about education in DC should be able to see the pros and cons of charters, they should also be able to see the pros and cons of IMPACT. It is completely possible we have extracted all the gains we are going to achieve, as an education system, from IMPACT and now it is time to think about doing something different. At some point, IMAPCT itself becomes too much the focus of educators — from central office to the classroom — and we need to refocus on what is happening with our kids and how much they are learning.

No, I shared the article but didn't write it. And my kids are in a charter school, so this doesn't directly affect us.

I'm familiar with the criticisms of IMPACT, which are also discussed in the article, but "It is completely possible we have extracted all the gains we are going to achieve, as an education system, from IMPACT" doesn't make any sense. Schools are continually hiring new teachers, and ensuring teacher quality is an ongoing job. If IMPACT worked well in the past, that's an argument for keeping it in the future. And if you don't like it, then the question is, what's a better approach? There are lots of great teachers in DCPS, but there are many who need help, and some who should never be in a classroom.