A reasonable question. I think the urgent priorities for DCPS in dealing with high SES areas (they also have urgent issues in improving education for the more at risk, of course) are making Hardy a successful neighborhood school (achieves the same thing that fixing the Hill does, but is almost certainly a lot easier) improving EOTP elementaries, and implementing the proposed new middle schools. At that time (5 years? ten years?) they can seriously reexamine the Hill - by that point they may also have improved EOTR schools enough to make OOB access to the Hill less of a political hot button. Or, maybe, ongoing demographic change will partially solve the problem, and open up new options for solving it. |
|
Catania is not supportive of MacFarland reopening in any way, shape or form. He wants to put other projects ahead of it and thinks its possible programming would make it a CHEC clone. I have no idea what he thinks middle years schooling for Barnard, Truesdell, etc., should be, but he is openly hostile to MacFarland reopening (probably because Bowser is openly supportive).
By leaving MacFarland closed and placing other projects ahead of it, Catania would effectively give it to the charter system, as it is too tempting a location to give up on and Catania has promised them easier facility access. This would effectively doom Roosevelt High School (if it has chances to survive in its current form) and allow a full charter takeover of Ward 4 above the elementary level. This is my analysis of the Catania positions together. |
so the gaffe here is that she said what she really thought, what everyone knows anyone in her position would likely really think, but which a good pol would not say. We complain about pols being phoney, and then complain when public officials are not phoney. Maybe DC where so many are professionals at spin gives us unrealistic expectations. She's the chancellor of a school system of a jurisdiction of less than 700,000 people (not the largest or even second largest in the metro area) not a congressional leader. |
I think there is a happy medium between phony and rude/dismissive but ultimately, what bothers me more about her statement is that she is incorrect (I am the PP who pointed out upthread that new families aren’t any more likely to stay in bad schools than old ones). Also, she is a school chancellor. She should not be blithe and dismissive about students leaving her system for any reason, other than graduation. |
| I wasn’t a fan of Rhee, but can deal with Henderson. What school district has a superintendent where administration and parents are happy? |
| First, DCPS spends millions of dollars to try to make their schools more physically attractive, to give students and teachers brand new technology, books, etc. It spends millions of dollars trying to pay teachers the highest in the area so that the best ones will stay here. It has shown success compared to other urban jurisdictions on the NAEP "TUDA" which shows growth in DCPS at a higher rate than other US cities. Lastly, enrollment is over 47,000 for the first time in forever and that had a lot to do with the begging (door knocking) that principals did over the summer. So to say that Kaya, et al doesn't care if kids go to DCPS or not is completely incorrect. Kaya could have quit long before now and taken a much more lucrative job in consulting or something if she didn't have her heart in the work. |
Are you saying that if she lives in Crestwood and her child attended, say, West, her child wouldn't have the right to feed into Deal for the foreseeable future? |
West is an Educational Campus that serves PK-8th grade. |
I don't think the Chancellor should have the luxury of choosing her battles. She's the Chancellor for all of DCPS, not just the easy wins at Hardy or shiny new middle schools proposed by the DME. |
Crestwood residents will have a right to attend Deal until MacFarland opens. We don't know what day that will be -- if it ever comes. But, if one assumes that 2016-2017 is a reasonable guess, her child will be assigned to MacFarland (just as my younger child would be) and not have a right to attend Deal. This is one reason why we moved our son to a Deal feeder. |
given limited resources, and limited political capital, I do not see how the Chancellor has the luxury of NOT choosing her battles. And of course she is still chancellor of the Hill schools, where teachers get paid, kids go to class, and learning takes place. Failing to resolve the desires of Hill families for a feeder arrangement that works better for them does not mean she is not their chancellor. |
Kayla wants sheep for parents, not fidgety, demanding, anal parents. |
|
There are people who think she needs to be beholden to people whose kids are not at any risk of real difficulties who want to fight over whether their kids get to go to Murch, Hearst, or Janney.
I would want to ignore those people too. And I hope her attention is on those at risk of real problems. |
Could she? or does she have to prove herself here, before any of those more lucrative jobs are offered? |
+1 As an affluent parent of a DCPS student, I find many of my peers to be insufferably privileged. (Hello DCUM!) |