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

[Anonymous]

The google reviews are quite chilling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they so confident?

Are they going to make kids repeat grades, so each class will have some older kids in it?

I hope so. That's one of the things I like about the school. Disruptive kids who can't hack it don't continue to disrupt.

Having kids repeat grades doesn’t work. If a kid doesn’t understand the academics in a particular grade, they need specialized intervention. Just the kid sit through the same content twice won’t do a thing. Additionally, kids who are retained are more likely to drop out since they legally can on their 18th birthday. That’s why schools don’t do it anymore.

Works great for me and my kids. My kids' classes are filled with kids at or above grade level, and disruptive kids who want attention instead of to learn feel uncomfortable in an environment where academic success is prioritized and rewarded.

We get it, you just want “those kids” out of the way. But having an individual kid repeat a grade isn’t going to improve that kid’s academic or life outcomes at all, and leaves the previous grade with those pesky retained kids. If your goal is to educate a kid, having them repeat a grade doesn’t do anything to accomplish that goal.

JFC. You continue to fall back on a false choice.

P.S. Yes, I want disruptive kids who don't care about learning the hell away from my kids and all other kids who want to learn. What's funny is you spend so much time around SJW who suffer liberal guilt that you don't quite know how to respond when people don't scurry away at being accused of "not caring" or in response to veiled accusations of racism (see, "those kids").

Wow your genius plan to warehouse kids with special needs is so ethical, and so very IDEA-compliant. What a nice, caring, empathetic person you must be.

Did you ever think about how we're all one car accident away from having special needs? Life can change in an instant. Be careful what you wish for.

There you go again with false choices. You frame the issue in such a way as to prevent honest discussion of issues. You immediately flee to your corner with: 15 year olds in K!!! Warehousing kids!!!

You spend a lot of time on these topics and yet seem woefully disinterested in solving the problems. You favor bumper stickers and talking points. Why are trade schools not a better option than social promotion? Why can't we consider the deleterious impact of these precious few on the larger population or kids? Why must you conflate special needs with disruptive a-holes who are perpetually truant and disruptive and violent? We are also just one bullet or botched robbery away from dying or trauma because some "HS grad" with a 5th grade education is in and out of prison, but thank the lord he wasn't held back.

What is your bizarre obsession with “bumper stickers?” It isn’t making you sound intelligent no matter how many times you repeatedly type it.

DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they so confident?

Are they going to make kids repeat grades, so each class will have some older kids in it?

I hope so. That's one of the things I like about the school. Disruptive kids who can't hack it don't continue to disrupt.

Having kids repeat grades doesn’t work. If a kid doesn’t understand the academics in a particular grade, they need specialized intervention. Just the kid sit through the same content twice won’t do a thing. Additionally, kids who are retained are more likely to drop out since they legally can on their 18th birthday. That’s why schools don’t do it anymore.

I. Don't. Care. I am sick of people like you arguing that kids like this should tear down an entire class, school and system. I think there are a whole lot more people like me who are done sitting on the sidelines watching a vocal minority argue that the majority of well meaning, hard working kids should suffer because of some liberal guilt or misplaced belief that "equity" means hurting the masses in furtherance of a few. Your failed policies predominantly hurt kids of color. They are the ones without options who are forced to attend schools with disruptive a-holes. Your interest in equity extends only as far as a bumper sticker. You are fine hurting all the other kids in those classes who want to learn in order to burnish your equity bona fides.

You (like so many others who chime in here) also present a false choice. As if the only options are social promotion or drop outs. If kids can't or won't hack it in traditional schools then there should be trade schools and non-traditional schools to divert them to. Your holy grail of social promotion through 12th grade is intellectually dishonest. Congrats, SJW! You have successfully created a system where hundreds (thousands?) of kids "graduate" from DCPS schools with 6th or 8th grade level math and and English skills and without having learned a trade. Now what? You think those kids are going to be able to get and keep jobs? You think they are going to show up and do the work at 18 because you gave them a fake diploma?

These are hard and serious issues and there are no easy solutions. People like you who dismiss alternatives and pretend like there is only one answer are part of the problem. You stifle open and honest discussion and lose sight of what and who you are actually seeking to help. Your policies are failing. All the high minded peer reviewed hogwash in the world won't change that.

It's sad that you don't care. Personally, I care about all the kids, and I also care that their rights under IDEA are observed, including the right to services and the right to the least restrictive placement. It seems you feel BASIS cannot comply with IDEA? Or that the staff at BASIS cannot maintain orderly classrooms? Sorry to hear it.

I think it telling that you didn't address any of the substantive criticisms of your "social promotions for all" and false binary outcome positioning. You fall back on bumper sticker platitudes that "personally, I care about all the kids" and try and divert this to a smaller discussion about IDEA (the details of which I could not care less about). What's your answer to socially promoting kids to a useless HS diploma with MS educations and a work ethic informed by having never had to work or be held to account? What's your answer to how your policies hurt poor kids and kids of color who don't have options to move or pay and end up with poor school environments? How does hurting all those other kids to cater to a small number of disruptive kids years behind grade level illustrate caring about "all" the kids?

When you want to have a discussion about these issues. let me know.

It doesn't matter if you care about IDEA. It's the law. BASIS has to care about it. I would like to know, and I hope the PCSB would also like to know, how BASIS plans to comply with IDEA. It's not a "smaller discussion", it's the law. It's not "catering", it's the law.

My answer would be that keeping kids with their age cohort is developmentally appropriate, and that they should receive services and intensive remediation so that they have their special needs addressed and catch up academically to the extent possible. Unfortunately this is expensive, but I believe the city should fund it because it'll pay off in the long term. Academic retention at BASIS does not address students' special needs, and is merely a way of motivating them to leave BASIS so that BASIS can claim to be "successful" and point to its good test scores, which are really achieved through demographics and attrition rather than anything particularly great about the teaching.

DP. IDEA does not forbid holding kids back. It also does not forbid failing kids out or giving them hard tests. What happens with BASIS is not that BASIS kicks kids out; it's that kids and their parents figure out the school isn't working for them. Because nobody actually wants to fail. All IDEA does is guarantee "access to the curriculum." It does not guarantee access to a particular curriculum, or that they child will not fail. I suppose if BASIS families did not self-select (insisted on staying in BASIS despite the fact that their kids cannot or will not step up academically) AND these kids legitimately had IEPs (unclear) then BASIS would have to provide some way to show the kids were learning something under the IDEA. But BASIS absolutely could still give them failing grades and retain them.

I am the poster who keeps pushing back against the person who thinks if they scream "IDEA violation!" enough times it will make people ignore they refuse to address the larger issues referenced in my replies. As I have said repeatedly, I don't know anything about IDEA (and I don't care, except to say that only the poster seems to know about the secret but unaddressed violations). That said, assuming you know what you are talking about, LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Do you know how stupid you sound when you type things like this? “LOLOLOLOL?” Are you 70 years old?

[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?

Stop deflecting and answer the question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, I just googled the locations of BASIS schools. They’re all in NYC, DC, Sillicon Valley, Phoenix & Scottsdale. If their model is go great, why aren’t there any in some rural industrial town in Pa, Detroit, St. Louis, Memphis or Buffalo?

Your Google (and spelling) skills aren't very good.

Here you go: https://basiscurriculumschools.com/home.php.

That's the wrong link. That link shows the schools using the BASIS curriculum. It is apples and oranges to suggest a private school that charged $50k/yr in tuition is the same thing and in the same category as tuition free charter schools. The charter schools are here: https://enrollbasis.com/about-basis-charter-schools/contact-basis-charter-schools/

No, the link is right, it just has an extra period.

Just go here and click on the yellow bar: https://basiscurriculumschools.com/home.php

Nope. Reading is fundamental my friend. You linked to all schools that use the BASIS curriculum. That includes private for profit schools. The relevant discussion is BASIS charter schools. These are the schools that are lottery, open to all and free to attendees.

Can't believe I am responding to this dumb response but no, you are incorrect. You are the one that is functionally illiterate when it comes to websites.

The link shows Basis charter schools (yellow bar), Basis private schools (red bar), and Basis international schools (blue bar).

If you click on the yellow bar, you get Basis charter schools--just as PP stated above.

You fed a link with private schools to a bunch of people who don't understand the difference between charter and tuition for profit schools. You did this after several people already chimed in to say BASIS had charter schools in NY and Silicon Valley (they don't). Just own that what you posted wasn't exactly on point. You are like a child who can't just accept even the most mild criticism.

Just admit you were wrong, dumsh*t.

No, she didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they so confident?

Are they going to make kids repeat grades, so each class will have some older kids in it?

I hope so. That's one of the things I like about the school. Disruptive kids who can't hack it don't continue to disrupt.

Having kids repeat grades doesn’t work. If a kid doesn’t understand the academics in a particular grade, they need specialized intervention. Just the kid sit through the same content twice won’t do a thing. Additionally, kids who are retained are more likely to drop out since they legally can on their 18th birthday. That’s why schools don’t do it anymore.

Works great for me and my kids. My kids' classes are filled with kids at or above grade level, and disruptive kids who want attention instead of to learn feel uncomfortable in an environment where academic success is prioritized and rewarded.

We get it, you just want “those kids” out of the way. But having an individual kid repeat a grade isn’t going to improve that kid’s academic or life outcomes at all, and leaves the previous grade with those pesky retained kids. If your goal is to educate a kid, having them repeat a grade doesn’t do anything to accomplish that goal.

JFC. You continue to fall back on a false choice.

P.S. Yes, I want disruptive kids who don't care about learning the hell away from my kids and all other kids who want to learn. What's funny is you spend so much time around SJW who suffer liberal guilt that you don't quite know how to respond when people don't scurry away at being accused of "not caring" or in response to veiled accusations of racism (see, "those kids").

Wow your genius plan to warehouse kids with special needs is so ethical, and so very IDEA-compliant. What a nice, caring, empathetic person you must be.

Did you ever think about how we're all one car accident away from having special needs? Life can change in an instant. Be careful what you wish for.

There you go again with false choices. You frame the issue in such a way as to prevent honest discussion of issues. You immediately flee to your corner with: 15 year olds in K!!! Warehousing kids!!!

You spend a lot of time on these topics and yet seem woefully disinterested in solving the problems. You favor bumper stickers and talking points. Why are trade schools not a better option than social promotion? Why can't we consider the deleterious impact of these precious few on the larger population or kids? Why must you conflate special needs with disruptive a-holes who are perpetually truant and disruptive and violent? We are also just one bullet or botched robbery away from dying or trauma because some "HS grad" with a 5th grade education is in and out of prison, but thank the lord he wasn't held back.

What is your bizarre obsession with “bumper stickers?” It isn’t making you sound intelligent no matter how many times you repeatedly type it.

DP

I think the point is that you use meaningless phrases that sound good but mean nothing if you think about them for half a second. It hurts my head that you are too dumb to understand that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, I just googled the locations of BASIS schools. They’re all in NYC, DC, Sillicon Valley, Phoenix & Scottsdale. If their model is go great, why aren’t there any in some rural industrial town in Pa, Detroit, St. Louis, Memphis or Buffalo?

You are confusing for profit BASIS Independent Schools (NY, Silicon Valley) with the free, pure lottery charter schools. The latter are in DC, Mesa, Phoenix, Baton Rouge and a bunch of other urban environments. Troll better.

Just as there are wealthy and less wealthy areas of DC, there are UMC and poor areas of all of those cities, and where you locate makes a huge difference in which of those populations can actually get there. If you’re going to need to take 3 busses to take your kid to school, you’re probably not going to send them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, I just googled the locations of BASIS schools. They’re all in NYC, DC, Sillicon Valley, Phoenix & Scottsdale. If their model is go great, why aren’t there any in some rural industrial town in Pa, Detroit, St. Louis, Memphis or Buffalo?

You are confusing for profit BASIS Independent Schools (NY, Silicon Valley) with the free, pure lottery charter schools. The latter are in DC, Mesa, Phoenix, Baton Rouge and a bunch of other urban environments. Troll better.

Just as there are wealthy and less wealthy areas of DC, there are UMC and poor areas of all of those cities, and where you locate makes a huge difference in which of those populations can actually get there. If you’re going to need to take 3 busses to take your kid to school, you’re probably not going to send them.

No doubt. The point you miss is why the distinction between for-profit/tuition versus lottery admission-free charters is so important. The latter are available to anyone. If they are willing to take 2 buses they have a fair shot. As opposed to to tuition or IB schools that are based on wealth and birth luck. Get it?

[Anonymous]

Where would the new location be? Any ideas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where would the new location be? Any ideas?

They have said they would ideally like the new school to be very close to the existing building.

[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.

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?

Stop deflecting and answer the question.

They did. Do you not know what "deflecting" means?

[Anonymous]

Basis Executives in Arizona are probably hunting for another outdated cramped awful office building where they can stick 500 to 800 kids---- with no outdoor space. They think they can get it cheap now due to WFH

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where would the new location be? Any ideas?

They have said they would ideally like the new school to be very close to the existing building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Basis Executives in Arizona are probably hunting for another outdated cramped awful office building where they can stick 500 to 800 kids---- with no outdoor space. They think they can get it cheap now due to WFH

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where would the new location be? Any ideas?

They have said they would ideally like the new school to be very close to the existing building.

Don't like it, don't send your kid there. Problem solved!

[Anonymous]

Should I not care about the well being of other children? Have had kids at Basis and the building is not suitable for staff and 650 kids to educate, learn and socialize ---- It absolutely plays a part in the retention issues with students and staff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Basis Executives in Arizona are probably hunting for another outdated cramped awful office building where they can stick 500 to 800 kids---- with no outdoor space. They think they can get it cheap now due to WFH

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where would the new location be? Any ideas?

They have said they would ideally like the new school to be very close to the existing building.

Don't like it, don't send your kid there. Problem solved!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Should I not care about the well being of other children? Have had kids at Basis and the building is not suitable for staff and 650 kids to educate, learn and socialize ---- It absolutely plays a part in the retention issues with students and staff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Basis Executives in Arizona are probably hunting for another outdated cramped awful office building where they can stick 500 to 800 kids---- with no outdoor space. They think they can get it cheap now due to WFH

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where would the new location be? Any ideas?

They have said they would ideally like the new school to be very close to the existing building.

Don't like it, don't send your kid there. Problem solved!

You had kids there and you decided it wasn't for you. So you left. Cool. Why do you think you get to make that decision for everyone else's kids?