A Note from a Public School Mom of Three & a Candidate's Wife

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: In the case of Settles and Sekou Biddle, it's the same person, Anita Bonds.

Sorry, got my recent at-large elections mixed up. Biddle was beaten by Vincent Orange, about as old school DC hack politician as you can get. Bonds won because the more progressive vote was split between Patrick Mara and Elissa Silverman. Thankfully Bryan Weaver dropped out of the Ward 1 race (temporarily) so Brianne Nadeau would have a clear shot at Jim Graham, who is just slightly less old school than Orange, but more of a hack.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe John Settles is the one who can start talking about that as a priority that would benefit all wards. Whatever his final position on neighborhood choice, I wish your team all the best. He's a refreshing candidate in a town that's increasingly tough to please, and it seems well on the way to election.

Totally agreed with everything you wrote, except, sadly, the last part quoted above. Settles reminds me a lot of Sekou Biddle- a refreshing, education-centric candidate who should be able to garner a lot of support across racial and economic lines, but is swamped by the name recognition of the old school DC politicians. In the case of Settles and Sekou Biddle, it's the same person, Anita Bonds. The City Paper poll had her up by over 30 points.

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/looselips/2014/03/27/anita-bonds-crushes-opponents-in-poll/

I wish that there was room for more people like Settles and Biddle on the Council. Grossso and McDuffie are a great start. But the reality is that a majority of the actual voters in the Democratic primary is a very small minority of the voters in the District, and they are disproportionately representative of the old school crowd, both literally (age) and figuratively (in outlook). But, that's how our system works. Those people get out and vote consistently, and therefore they get the attention and the politicians they want.

While I agree that Settles has a difficult challenge, the same poll you quoted showed that 37% were undecided. Also, that poll was taken before Settles was endorsed by the Current Newspapers. That may not be enough to make the necessary difference, but it's enough to delay being discouraged for a couple more days.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

While I agree that Settles has a difficult challenge, the same poll you quoted showed that 37% were undecided. Also, that poll was taken before Settles was endorsed by the Current Newspapers. That may not be enough to make the necessary difference, but it's enough to delay being discouraged for a couple more days.

Hope you are right. Imagine this Council with Grosso, McDuffie, Biddle, Silverman, Settles, Nadeau or Weaver, Allen or Thompson. That would be a majority of forward thinking, really sharp politicians who aren't completely in the bag to the old school system. To dream a little dream...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is Jacqui Settles.

We had to take John's mom to the hospital last night so I apologize for the delay in responding to your questions.

Regarding Neighborhood Preference for Charters:

First, this issue is why John believes we have to have better collaboration and cooperation between DCPS and Charters. He supports a limited percentage of neighborhood slots-20%. John understands the concern that neighborhood preference may limit access to children from low income areas, especially those East of the River where they have lower percentages of quality schools.

The reason he believes in a limited percentage of neighborhood slots is that he has spoken with both low income and middle class families who haven't been able to lottery into the nearby charter, and they have expressed difficulty with the time and financial burden of driving or using public transportation to get to a school across town. City Wide Middle School HS Lottery:

John does not like this idea. He believes the city should create magnet middle schools and also offer specialty programs. John sees the situation with our middle schools as a crisis which is impacting our elementary schools particularly with regard to 4th & 5th grade enrollment.

I want to note that while some of you may not agree with all of his positions, what you should know about John is he really does think through issues. So, he's not going to BS you or tap dance around where he stands. However, he is a phenomenal listener (much better than I am ) and he truly considers all points of view when making a decision.

If you have any questions, I'll do my best to respond (although I may be a little slower than normal today since his mom took ill). Thanks again for the engagement!

The bolded is absolute horse poopy. I want the name(s) of these "charters in low income areas" where the parents haven't been able to lottery in. Sure, there are probably plenty of middle class families who feel that way, but the random lottery isn't to protect the middle class, it's to provide equal possibility of access to EVERYONE, including those living near the worst schools.

If his position is neighborhood preference for charters at all, even 20%, he has already lost my vote, and he can't get it back until the next time he runs with a different platform.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
If his position is neighborhood preference for charters at all, even 20%, he has already lost my vote, and he can't get it back until the next time he runs with a different platform.

Sadly, you won't won't be able to vote for an At-Large candidate because all the Democrats support neighborhood preference. I will see Settles in about an 20 minutes and I'll discuss this topic with him. I'll report back in a couple of hours.

[Anonymous]

I hope that the people on this forum really go out and make a statement. The status quo doesn't pay any attention to the "parent education advocates" bc historically we don't turn out to vote. If everyone reading this thread told 10 people not on this thread to vote (and IMHO vote for Settles) we would be courted in the next election as a constituency group. Imagine that!

[Anonymous]

Pp here... I shld hve said that our numbers would make a statement and we would be courted as a result...

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is his policy on whether to grant a neighborhood preference to charter schools? Thanks.

He has previously said that he supports neighborhood preference. However, so do all of his opponents in the primary. So, while I disagree with his position, it's a wash this time around.

Jeff,
I am a single issue voter now - NO neighborhood preference for charter schools. 20-25%? Can you imagine what that will do to Latin, BASIS, and Yu Ying? Actually BASIS is the only one who ultimately will be able to cope by flunking anyone out who does not pass comps/classes, but if they took a 5th grade spot instead of a kid who could have been in LEAP math, in Algebra I, that would enrage me anyway. Who has the smallest quota and who might change their mind? It flies in the face of the purpose of charter schools and many have buses anyway so this 'I cannot get my kid...." my kid takes two metrobuses as will my 5th grader next year...

Could you please tell me of the at large candidates, and candidates for Chair of DC council and anyone else we are all allowed to choose from (I am ward 3) who
a) is actually against this stupid policy which will destroy the charter schools (25% of Washington Latin which is so small are you kidding me?) or 25% of Yu Ying where none of them care about or speak Chinese......
b) has the smallest quota proposal and
c) who if anyone might change their mind?

d) besides Mary Cheh, is there anyone else who is willing to yank DC promise if DC TAG gets pulled?
e) Is there anyone else who wants to have G&T programs in MS like Hardy

If, despite DC promise, I want Catania to win, should I vote for Gray in the primary not Bowser?

TIA

Sorry Mrs. Settles,
and I am sorry about your MIL but
I don't believe in street cred for public school kids unless you have kids at an exclusive private school instead and more importantly

if your husband really cared about charter schools he would not be talking neighborhood preference at all, and absolutely would not go up to 25%
given that Yu Ying does not admit after a very early grade,
language immersion schools need more native speakers,
Latin is tiny and 9th grade spaces are slim and
Basis, the only one with no social promotion, does not admit after high attrition due to comps in 6th grade and already has a pyramid model and that precalculus is a prerequisite for graduation....

There is a lot being asked here and I don't have the knowledge to answer it all. There is no significant opposition to Cheh for Ward 3 Council Member or Mendleson for Chair. So, I'm not sure it matters what their position on neighborhood preference is and, in any case, I don't know in either case. Among the Mayoral candidates, Evans, Bowser, and Wells all support preference. Among the Democratic At-Large candidates, all support it.

I see validity in the argument that voting for Gray is the best strategy for electing Catania. However, I don't accept that strategy myself and have not adhered to it. My advice -- not very widely accepted, but nevertheless -- is to vote for the candidate that best represents your priorities and leaving picking a winner to lottery tickets.

I will say this about neighborhood preference for charters. I am surprised at the importance that has been suddenly attached to this issue. I have not seen such interest in the topic until recently. I've been a charter school parent for nearly 10 years and only came to understand the issue within the past year myself. The way neighborhood preference was first presented to me -- as a solution for neighborhoods in which no good DCPS schools existed -- it seems like a positive solution. For quite a while I was ambivalent about the issue. Over the past few months, I posted a number of posts expressing opposition to neighborhood preference that frequently resulted in responses questioning my position. So, I think this is a new topic to many.

All of that is to say that I think many of the candidates who support neighborhood preference may simply need to understand the issue better. It is likely that they have only heard about neighborhood preference from those who support it and have not been exposed to counter arguments. Moreover, in the press of a campaign, candidates are asked to respond to a large number of questionnaires listing a broad range of topics. Answers can sometimes be provided on the spur of the moment and not given as much thought as required. Serious candidates will try to stick to a position once it is taken rather than providing whatever answer best suits them at the moment.

Finally, while opposing neighborhood preferences, I concede that it could be possible to implement such preferences in a very specific manner in which preference can actually be a good thing. However, I don't have much hope in such methods being chosen for DC.

Jeff I respect your opinion a lot. Please tell me (even though it's a little off topic, but hey, this is DCUM!) what would be a way to implement neighborhood preference in "a very specific manner" where it would "actually be a good thing"? As you know, the bad things are: 1) it does nothing to improve any of the underperforming schools; 2) cuts off access to those residents of low income neighborhoods to speciality schools not in their neighborhoods (language immersion, montessori, etc); and 3) the point already made above about language immersion schools and limiting that much more the chances for native speakers if the school is not in a native speaking community. What is the good you see possible and how do you see implementing to serve a good that is bigger than these bads?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
Jeff I respect your opinion a lot. Please tell me (even though it's a little off topic, but hey, this is DCUM!) what would be a way to implement neighborhood preference in "a very specific manner" where it would "actually be a good thing"? As you know, the bad things are: 1) it does nothing to improve any of the underperforming schools; 2) cuts off access to those residents of low income neighborhoods to speciality schools not in their neighborhoods (language immersion, montessori, etc); and 3) the point already made above about language immersion schools and limiting that much more the chances for native speakers if the school is not in a native speaking community. What is the good you see possible and how do you see implementing to serve a good that is bigger than these bads?

If all the following conditions applied:

1) The focus of the charter was relatively general. Not a language immersion program, for instance;
2) The school was located in an underprivileged neighborhood;
3) The school was well-settled in that location;
4) There were no good DCPS choices in that neighborhood;
6) The policy was specific to this school and other schools meeting similar criteria;

Then, neighborhood preference might make sense. The intent would not to be replace a DCPS, but to fill a need that DCPS is not addressing. Also, I'm writing this when I was supposed to be out the door 5 minutes ago. So, I retain my right to revise and extend and/or totally deny that I wrote his message

[Anonymous]

@ Mrs Settles,
Can you give the reason(s) why your family left Inspired Teaching for Hearst? Also, since your kids are OOB for Hearst, what are your husband's thoughts about the OOB feeder rights? Should those be revoked before changing the boundaries of Deal?

[Anonymous]

John definitely has our votes. We know the Settles slightly and although he favors neighborhood preference, if he is open, then he is open. Also, he has the most common sense solution to housing-buy housing stock (there is more, you'll have to go to the website). He is not a duck and cover kind of person, you will always know where he stands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:@ Mrs Settles,
Can you give the reason(s) why your family left Inspired Teaching for Hearst? Also, since your kids are OOB for Hearst, what are your husband's thoughts about the OOB feeder rights? Should those be revoked before changing the boundaries of Deal?

Great question.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Jeff I respect your opinion a lot. Please tell me (even though it's a little off topic, but hey, this is DCUM!) what would be a way to implement neighborhood preference in "a very specific manner" where it would "actually be a good thing"? As you know, the bad things are: 1) it does nothing to improve any of the underperforming schools; 2) cuts off access to those residents of low income neighborhoods to speciality schools not in their neighborhoods (language immersion, montessori, etc); and 3) the point already made above about language immersion schools and limiting that much more the chances for native speakers if the school is not in a native speaking community. What is the good you see possible and how do you see implementing to serve a good that is bigger than these bads?

If all the following conditions applied:

1) The focus of the charter was relatively general. Not a language immersion program, for instance;
2) The school was located in an underprivileged neighborhood;
3) The school was well-settled in that location;
4) There were no good DCPS choices in that neighborhood;
6) The policy was specific to this school and other schools meeting similar criteria;

Then, neighborhood preference might make sense. The intent would not to be replace a DCPS, but to fill a need that DCPS is not addressing. Also, I'm writing this when I was supposed to be out the door 5 minutes ago. So, I retain my right to revise and extend and/or totally deny that I wrote his message

That seems to be a solution to a problem that doesn't exist: charters in low income neighborhoods that are so popular, families living close to the school can't get in because families from all over the district are taking up the slots. That simply does not happen. Can you or anyone else name one single DC charter in a low income neighborhood where there is a waiting list and everyone who wants to go doesn't get in? I know a lot about charters - I can't think of any. What you say would only make sense where there is a charter in a low income community where there is real competition to get in. There isn't one. Implementing this for that purpose basically opens a huge dangerous can of worms that would do more to hurt low income families than help them, because once it's on the books at all as a possibility, middle and upper income families in non-low income neighborhoods will be screaming for this to be applied to their local schools. Which, again cuts off access to the most underserved families in the neighborhoods with the worst schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:John definitely has our votes. We know the Settles slightly and although he favors neighborhood preference, if he is open, then he is open. Also, he has the most common sense solution to housing-buy housing stock (there is more, you'll have to go to the website). He is not a duck and cover kind of person, you will always know where he stands.

I'm sorry, but it is pure insanity to vote for a candidate who has a specific position on something, that I disagree with, but to vote for them anyway because they're "open". The time to be open and do research as a candidate is BEFORE stating the position. Not to say "I'm in favor of this thing which, now I'm realizing a lot more people oppose than I thought, but vote for me anyway and we'll talk after I get elected". I'm only voting for a candidate who opposes neighborhood preference for charters. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The reason he believes in a limited percentage of neighborhood slots is that he has spoken with both low income and middle class families who haven't been able to lottery into the nearby charter, and they have expressed difficulty with the time and financial burden of driving or using public transportation to get to a school across town.

First, I think it's great that you're willing to come out from behind anonymity to address this tough crowd. You sound pretty earnest and your support speaks to me as a mother with education issues top of mind.

I can also appreciate an at-large candidate speaking to the needs of low and middle class families on getting access to schools. But I think the position above really underscores a need to bolster the neighborhood offering of DCPS.

We live in Petworth and have proximity to so many great charters that it's painful to be shut out of all of them. But when it gets right down to it, few of them are what I would choose if we simply had a very strong neighborhood school. I understand the trend toward language immersion, but it's not as much a priority in our family as solid reading and math ability at the elementary level. Montessori is also pretty hot right now, but it's not ideal for every kid. We like the expeditonary learning model and it's frustrating to be competing for seats with people who don't know or care what that is.

But the reality is that it's so hard to get into these schools past PK4, and the DCPS options are so suboptimal that it feels irresponsible not to go for every possible shot at every school that's at least decent--which is what diminishes the chances for everyone. It's also what creates the high anxiety at lottery time and the high anguish at results. Many of us can't or won't consider driving across town, making charters an all or nothing proposition. That's crazy, untenable, and puts undue pressure on charters to change what they're all about in order to accomodate.

So I don't want a preference for my neighbors at a nearby charter. i want my neighbors to have a preference for the nearby DCPS. And I want that DCPS to offer a very solid, non-specialized program that's still a responsible choice for those who don't want or need specialized programs.

Maybe John Settles is the one who can start talking about that as a priority that would benefit all wards. Whatever his final position on neighborhood choice, I wish your team all the best. He's a refreshing candidate in a town that's increasingly tough to please, and it seems well on the way to election.

Are you running for anything? I like you!