Given the rigor of Basis, was it ever expected to be for every kid in the District?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
I found a history going back to the charter board’s decision to approve Basis. There is an article in the Washington post from 5/11/11 that describes the controversy (link below). Here are some quotes from the article:
“The charter board’s approval overrode the objections of its staff members and four consultants, who said Basis could not demonstrate how it would adapt its rigorous approach to the District “McKoy, the only board member who voted against the opening of Basis when it was approved last month, said he thought that the charter operator “brushed aside” concerns about the ability of students behind grade level to succeed. Most charter board members said that the Basis record in Tucson, which includes a Top 10 ranking in Newsweek’s annual high school survey for the past five years and annual standardized test scores that exceed statewide averages, has earned the school a chance in the District. Board Chairman Brian Jones said the approval of Basis is contingent on how the school demonstrates it will reach out to diverse sectors of the city. …. “As a school model with that kind of rigor, Basis at the end of the day may not be for every family in the District,” Jones said. “But that’s part of the genius of the charter school model. There’s a diversity of models — the whole notion of letting a thousand academic flowers bloom.” “Reviewers also flagged abnormally high projected attrition: Of the 145 fifth-graders expected to enroll in 2012, 38 would remain Basis students by ninth grade, a retention rate of just over 25 percent. My own reading on this is that the school may have been understood by the board from the beginning to be designed for very hard working and/or advanced kids. And, so long as the kids that Basis retains after the shakeout period are from various social, racial and economic backgrounds, that the school would be seen as a success by the board. The board may expect and may be comfortable with the idea of self selection based on very hard working and/or advanced kids. Is there more to this story? Does anyone have first-hand knowledge of what really happened? http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/dc-demographics-could-challenge-new-charter-school/2011/05/06/AFfIEksG_story_1.html |
Anonymous
| Please, booster, stop starting such inflammatory posts. Your persistent attempts to start trouble are tiresome. |
Anonymous
^ you are no doubt the same anti-BASIS person who constantly accuses others of trying to shut you down and here you are, telling others to shut up. |
Anonymous
|
Actually, OP makes a very interesting point. Although there was disagreement on the charter board around the Basis model, in the end it seems they endorsed the idea of charter schools filling "niches" in the city's public school system that aren't addressed elsewhere. Same with charter schools for emotionally troubled kids (options ) and language immersion, and boarding schools, and adult education.
It is allowed and lawful and deemed beneficial by our public officials. |
Anonymous
| OP, here. Why is this an inflammatory idea? |
Anonymous
Because the predominant idea in DC is to be EQUAL (as opposed to being fair). A few years ago DCPS conducted a research project called Hopes and Dreams to see what education stakeholders in DC wanted, and the top result was "an equal school system." See this link: http://dcps.dc.gov/DCPS/Files/downloads/ABOUT%20DCPS/Strategic%20Documents/DCPS-Report-Hopes-and-Dreams.pdf Crabs in a barrel. |
Anonymous
I do not think meeting the needs of different kids with different needs via different schools with different educational models is unequal at all. What is crazy to me is wanting to meet the needs of different students via the same educational model. I say give people choices! |
Anonymous
| What DC did for years is build a school system with equality - it was equally bad for everyone. |
Anonymous
|
I bet we don't wear the same jeans size. Or bra size. Or ring size. Why? Because one size does not fit all.
Does this mean we are being treated unequally? Does my size 2 and your 36C make us separate but unequal? |
Anonymous
True. Funny and sad. |
Anonymous
| OP here. If there is not more to this story then what was printed in the WP (and that’s a Big If) then it shouldn’t be taboo to say/think that the school was designed at the outset to be a place for very hard working and/or advanced kids, in a race/class/sex neutral way. Why tip-toe around? |
Anonymous
It is called differentiation, and anyone in the field of education gets inundated by this concept course after course regardless of the teaching method. The sad thing however is that it is not being used, or is being used minimally by many teachers. The same complex concept can be taught to the very advanced and below grade student in the same classroom if the teacher can create different test formats to accommodate all students. This way everyone ( including ESL, learning disabled) is served. Not too difficult to do. It's just more time consuming but gives every student an equitable chance to grow and succeed. |
Anonymous
You haven't lived here very long, have you. When we discuss race and class at all here, we tiptoe around it. |
Anonymous
I think it's because that's pretty much the basis of the whole charter debate - instead of investing resources into neighborhood schools in order to bring these types of specialized programs to those schools, is it better to pull the resources out and just create specialized schools? When you put the resources into neighborhood schools, there's the idea that a rising tide lifts all boats; when you pull resources out and create specialized schools, it can seem like a quick fix that will help the few who are able to gain access to the school, but ultimately won't help create a stronger school system. |
Anonymous
It's not difficult to teach students who range from non-readers to advanced multiple lessons and subjects every day? Is it super easy to plan those things, too? |