Explain how lottery changes would make Ward 3 Schools WORSE

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In short:

Each school gets the same $ per student; so it's the parents and community and caliber of the students that make a school great. Without predictability the those types of parents/students will leave. No question. Deal and Wilson are great because the parents (IB an OOB) and Kids (IB and OOB) are generally more motivated and come from good elementary schools. The OOB families that are in the feeders took the extra step to get their kids in and schlepp them across town, that says something about them, regardless of their SES or race. The resources those schools spend on struggling kids pales in comparison to the resources schools EOTP spend. Inject more struggling and less motivated kids (and less active parents) into those schools and in a few years they will be in the same state as most of the schools EOTP.

So if take a school like Deal or Wilson, remove a substantial portion of the motivated, high achieving and committed families (whether IB or OBB) and then inject a substantial portion of kids who are testing seriously below proficient from families that aren't active in improving the schools, you are just giving Deal and Wilson the same problems the schools EOTP have. The new Deal and Wilson will have to divert $$ to address those issues, at the cost of the programs for the more advanced or even proficient kids leading to more abandonment to private and suburban schools. It's just a domino effect.

Absolutely, but if you don't believe that then common sense and reasoning doesn't make any difference. There's no evidence that a school building and teachers alone can make a school "high performing" and plenty of evidence the the preparedness of the kids and the support and SES of the families have a huge positive effect. But if despite all that, School leadership insists that "all it takes is a great teacher..." and that "low-performing schools" should be closed, then the system will continue to be dysfunctional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Each school does NOT receive the same per pupil $ allocation.

Yes they do, but some PTAs raise money to supplement.

NP here, and not an expert, but I think Title 1 schools receive more money per pupil than non Title one schools.

[Anonymous]

11:58 here -- meant to add this is ass backwards. Don't move kids from a failing school across town, make those schools better by addressing the underlying causes of the problem, e.g. poverty, broken familes, etc. And, have at least some OOB set asides. The brutal truth is that in contrast to some families from EOTP that exert great efforts to get their kids into and commute to good schools, and invest in those schools, families from Deal/Wilson (and I am one of them) simply will not trepse across town to Eastern to make it better when most of us have the means to simply move to the burbs. It's unfortunate but it is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In short:

Each school gets the same $ per student; so it's the parents and community and caliber of the students that make a school great. Without predictability the those types of parents/students will leave. No question. Deal and Wilson are great because the parents (IB an OOB) and Kids (IB and OOB) are generally more motivated and come from good elementary schools. The OOB families that are in the feeders took the extra step to get their kids in and schlepp them across town, that says something about them, regardless of their SES or race. The resources those schools spend on struggling kids pales in comparison to the resources schools EOTP spend. Inject more struggling and less motivated kids (and less active parents) into those schools and in a few years they will be in the same state as most of the schools EOTP.

So if take a school like Deal or Wilson, remove a substantial portion of the motivated, high achieving and committed families (whether IB or OBB) and then inject a substantial portion of kids who are testing seriously below proficient from families that aren't active in improving the schools, you are just giving Deal and Wilson the same problems the schools EOTP have. The new Deal and Wilson will have to divert $$ to address those issues, at the cost of the programs for the more advanced or even proficient kids leading to more abandonment to private and suburban schools. It's just a domino effect.

Absolutely, but if you don't believe that then common sense and reasoning doesn't make any difference. There's no evidence that a school building and teachers alone can make a school "high performing" and plenty of evidence the the preparedness of the kids and the support and SES of the families have a huge positive effect. But if despite all that, School leadership insists that "all it takes is a great teacher..." and that "low-performing schools" should be closed, then the system will continue to be dysfunctional.

School leadership knows very well that the kids and families have a huge effect, and this is why the proposal of citywide lottery was made, to "redistribute" high SES and highly motivated kids to all schools. if the school leadership tought that all it takes is a great teacher, then all they would have to do is just hire great teachers for bad schools and we would not be here discussing about sending Oyster kids to Cardozo or having Wilson as citywide lottery HS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Each school does NOT receive the same per pupil $ allocation.

Yes they do, but some PTAs raise money to supplement.

And the PTAs do not raise nearly as much as the additional money schools with high farms percentage get through title I.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually I've seen very little opposition to the idea of OOB set-asides -- I don't think I've heard one person say, "oh, if they do this, we would pull our kids." It's not letting OOB kids in, it's the inability to plan and the inconvenience. It's not as if only Ward 3 parents care about this -- Hearst didn't go up until 5th grade until it became a Deal feeder. Elementary schools EOTP that are perfectly good for PK3, PK4, and kindergarten undergo an enormous amount of churn as parents move their kids into Deal feeders. What makes you think Ward 3 parents are any different?

And it's like school leadership has given up on the idea of improving education anywhere but where it's already good, so their only solution is to juggle around more kids in those areas (e.g. ward three and some parts of Capitol hill) and wait for the magic to happen -- never considering that the people in those neighborhoods who are majorly involved in making schools good for their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Each school does NOT receive the same per pupil $ allocation.

Yes they do, but some PTAs raise money to supplement.

NP here, and not an expert, but I think Title 1 schools receive more money per pupil than non Title one schools.

If that's true, and it may be, then it's even stronger support for now injecting those kids who with extra $$ can't even get to proficient into schools like Deal and Wilson who at least until they qualify as Title I won't get the extra money! So we would be moving kids that need and currently get more $$ to schools where they wouldn't get that added financial support (and forget about PTA supplements -- they'll dive). Just f/e we have given over $4000 to the Deal PTA over the last few years. But I won't write another check at this point if I need to save to go private for HS or move (not to mention get less $$ for our house than we invested).

[Anonymous]

12:30

meant "not" injecting those kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In short:

Each school gets the same $ per student; so it's the parents and community and caliber of the students that make a school great. Without predictability the those types of parents/students will leave. No question. Deal and Wilson are great because the parents (IB an OOB) and Kids (IB and OOB) are generally more motivated and come from good elementary schools. The OOB families that are in the feeders took the extra step to get their kids in and schlepp them across town, that says something about them, regardless of their SES or race. The resources those schools spend on struggling kids pales in comparison to the resources schools EOTP spend. Inject more struggling and less motivated kids (and less active parents) into those schools and in a few years they will be in the same state as most of the schools EOTP.

So if take a school like Deal or Wilson, remove a substantial portion of the motivated, high achieving and committed families (whether IB or OBB) and then inject a substantial portion of kids who are testing seriously below proficient from families that aren't active in improving the schools, you are just giving Deal and Wilson the same problems the schools EOTP have. The new Deal and Wilson will have to divert $$ to address those issues, at the cost of the programs for the more advanced or even proficient kids leading to more abandonment to private and suburban schools. It's just a domino effect.

Absolutely, but if you don't believe that then common sense and reasoning doesn't make any difference. There's no evidence that a school building and teachers alone can make a school "high performing" and plenty of evidence the the preparedness of the kids and the support and SES of the families have a huge positive effect. But if despite all that, School leadership insists that "all it takes is a great teacher..." and that "low-performing schools" should be closed, then the system will continue to be dysfunctional.

School leadership knows very well that the kids and families have a huge effect, and this is why the proposal of citywide lottery was made, to "redistribute" high SES and highly motivated kids to all schools. if the school leadership tought that all it takes is a great teacher, then all they would have to do is just hire great teachers for bad schools and we would not be here discussing about sending Oyster kids to Cardozo or having Wilson as citywide lottery HS

YES kids and familes have a great effect. But simply put, no or few Ward 3 parents are going to even let their kids schlepp across town to attend Coolige or Eastern. It only works one way; familes from EOTP are willing to undertake the effort and invest in schools that area already good. Families in the Deal/Wilson area can and will just move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In short:

Each school gets the same $ per student; so it's the parents and community and caliber of the students that make a school great. Without predictability the those types of parents/students will leave. No question. Deal and Wilson are great because the parents (IB an OOB) and Kids (IB and OOB) are generally more motivated and come from good elementary schools. The OOB families that are in the feeders took the extra step to get their kids in and schlepp them across town, that says something about them, regardless of their SES or race. The resources those schools spend on struggling kids pales in comparison to the resources schools EOTP spend. Inject more struggling and less motivated kids (and less active parents) into those schools and in a few years they will be in the same state as most of the schools EOTP.

So if take a school like Deal or Wilson, remove a substantial portion of the motivated, high achieving and committed families (whether IB or OBB) and then inject a substantial portion of kids who are testing seriously below proficient from families that aren't active in improving the schools, you are just giving Deal and Wilson the same problems the schools EOTP have. The new Deal and Wilson will have to divert $$ to address those issues, at the cost of the programs for the more advanced or even proficient kids leading to more abandonment to private and suburban schools. It's just a domino effect.

Absolutely, but if you don't believe that then common sense and reasoning doesn't make any difference. There's no evidence that a school building and teachers alone can make a school "high performing" and plenty of evidence the the preparedness of the kids and the support and SES of the families have a huge positive effect. But if despite all that, School leadership insists that "all it takes is a great teacher..." and that "low-performing schools" should be closed, then the system will continue to be dysfunctional.

School leadership knows very well that the kids and families have a huge effect, and this is why the proposal of citywide lottery was made, to "redistribute" high SES and highly motivated kids to all schools. if the school leadership tought that all it takes is a great teacher, then all they would have to do is just hire great teachers for bad schools and we would not be here discussing about sending Oyster kids to Cardozo or having Wilson as citywide lottery HS

OK -- school leadership SAYS that all that is needed is great teaching -- and they say that now there is great teaching all over town, thanks to their IMPACT system that has weeded out the bad apples. But, you're correct, that at some level, they know that isn't right because it hasn't worked. So now the only way they see to get the scores up (which is apparently all they care about) is to move the high scorers around to up the scores a bit (or a lot) wherever they do. Of course, the scores will go down in they places they leave, but have they thought that far? Doesn't seem like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Each school does NOT receive the same per pupil $ allocation.

Yes they do, but some PTAs raise money to supplement.

You are the Fox News of DCUM. Repeat a falsehood often enough and people will start believing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11:58 here -- meant to add this is ass backwards. Don't move kids from a failing school across town, make those schools better by addressing the underlying causes of the problem, e.g. poverty, broken familes, etc. And, have at least some OOB set asides. The brutal truth is that in contrast to some families from EOTP that exert great efforts to get their kids into and commute to good schools, and invest in those schools, families from Deal/Wilson (and I am one of them) simply will not trepse across town to Eastern to make it better when most of us have the means to simply move to the burbs. It's unfortunate but it is true.

Nothing unfortunate about it -- it makes perfect sense -- as much as it's sensible for engaged, able oob parents to schlep their kids to ward 3 (until 2015, at least) , and that it's sensible to provide services for kids with unengaged, unable parents near where they live.

But we're not talking about what's sensible here -- we're dealing with people in leadership who want to make a grand gesture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Each school does NOT receive the same per pupil $ allocation.

Yes they do, but some PTAs raise money to supplement.

You are the Fox News of DCUM. Repeat a falsehood often enough and people will start believing it.

Correct

Title I schools get higher per pupil allocation than non Title I schools.

[Anonymous]

"YES kids and familes have a great effect. But simply put, no or few Ward 3 parents are going to even let their kids schlepp across town to attend Coolige or Eastern. It only works one way; familes from EOTP are willing to undertake the effort and invest in schools that area already good. Families in the Deal/Wilson area can and will just move."

I already schlepped across town and bought a small condo in a new neighborhood so my kids could go to a reliably good school. Now I schlepp across town to my job after walking my kids to school. So no, I don't want them to have go back across town for school and I don't want to move to Maryland or Virginia either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Each school does NOT receive the same per pupil $ allocation.

Yes they do, but some PTAs raise money to supplement.

You are the Fox News of DCUM. Repeat a falsehood often enough and people will start believing it.

Correct

Title I schools get higher per pupil allocation than non Title I schools.

The Uniform Per Student Funding Formula (UPSFF) set annually by OSSE establishes a BASELINE which is then supplemented by the DCPS Weighted Student Formula (WSF) that adjusts allocations for each school according to unique factors such as grade level, FARMS eligibility, levels of SpEd need, and English proficiency. Some schools them receive additional funding through Federal grants and programs like Title I.