Basis DC just withdrew its request to amend their charter and add elementary school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The Board asked hard questions about whether they are truly committed and capable of serving any and all students in the city who would get in through the lottery. The proposal didn't suggest that they were and they were told to shore up their application in the month between the hearing and the vote.

From a political and optics perspective BASIS didn't do itself any favors by saying in the application that they were only interested in locating in Wards 1-6 or by having only 1 of the BASIS DC Board members in attendance for the p public hearing (there were 5 or 6 BASIS.ed staff from Arizona there). The local Board member who went was unfortunately unable to answer many questions about the plans (solely because she was pretty new to the Board and wasn't privy to the discussion about deciding to pursue an elementary school).

I watched the entire hearing. The board seems to place an unreasonable emphasis on issues like school location and the ability to serve special needs students. If Basis wants to open a charter in ward 2, near their current school, let them. If someone else wants to open a charter in ward 8, let them. If Basis wants to open a charter emphasizing rigorous academic achievement or have a grading system that is final exam heavy, great. If someone else wants to open a charter focused on remedial education, also great. Does the charter board criticize Yu Ying because it only caters to students and parents who want Mandarin immersion? I have no issue with the charter board ensuring schools adhere to fair and open access through the lottery, meet reasonable educational benchmarks, provide an acceptable physical environment and otherwise ensure students aren't being mistreated, but it was clear from the hearing that they go well above and beyond this to impose their own preconceptions and are limiting the ability for parents to decide which school is best for their child.

The board is consistent - they emphasize location and ability to serve special needs, ELL or at-risk students with every charter application. With 74% of DC students qualifying for FARMS, they need to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The Board asked hard questions about whether they are truly committed and capable of serving any and all students in the city who would get in through the lottery. The proposal didn't suggest that they were and they were told to shore up their application in the month between the hearing and the vote.

From a political and optics perspective BASIS didn't do itself any favors by saying in the application that they were only interested in locating in Wards 1-6 or by having only 1 of the BASIS DC Board members in attendance for the p public hearing (there were 5 or 6 BASIS.ed staff from Arizona there). The local Board member who went was unfortunately unable to answer many questions about the plans (solely because she was pretty new to the Board and wasn't privy to the discussion about deciding to pursue an elementary school).

I watched the entire hearing. The board seems to place an unreasonable emphasis on issues like school location and the ability to serve special needs students. If Basis wants to open a charter in ward 2, near their current school, let them. If someone else wants to open a charter in ward 8, let them. If Basis wants to open a charter emphasizing rigorous academic achievement or have a grading system that is final exam heavy, great. If someone else wants to open a charter focused on remedial education, also great. Does the charter board criticize Yu Ying because it only caters to students and parents who want Mandarin immersion? I have no issue with the charter board ensuring schools adhere to fair and open access through the lottery, meet reasonable educational benchmarks, provide an acceptable physical environment and otherwise ensure students aren't being mistreated, but it was clear from the hearing that they go well above and beyond this to impose their own preconceptions and are limiting the ability for parents to decide which school is best for their child.

The board is consistent - they emphasize location and ability to serve special needs, ELL or at-risk students with every charter application. With 74% of DC students qualifying for FARMS, they need to.

And this is why dcps sucks, they should let them take only the intelligent there are plenty of dcps schools taking the low achievers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The board is consistent - they emphasize location and ability to serve special needs, ELL or at-risk students with every charter application. With 74% of DC students qualifying for FARMS, they need to.

They may be consistent, but they don't "need to" emphasize these issues and doing so is misguided. First of all, just because a student qualifies for FARM does not make them a special needs student. I was a FARM student and benefitted greatly from a rigorous academic program. It's somewhat insulting to suggest that high percentage of FARM students obviates the need for such programs. Second, even if this were true, the remaining 26% constitute way more than 10,000 students. This is a very large population to simply write off.

In any case, I'm not arguing against allowing charters that cater to students with special needs or particular interests or underserved wards, nor is anyone else. I'm suggesting that the role of the board should be to make more reasonable choices available to parents, not less and not impose their own preconceptions upon potential new charter organizations. Let the parents decide.

[Anonymous]

Wouldn't it make more sense for them to open another middle school instead of an elementary school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The board is consistent - they emphasize location and ability to serve special needs, ELL or at-risk students with every charter application. With 74% of DC students qualifying for FARMS, they need to.

They may be consistent, but they don't "need to" emphasize these issues and doing so is misguided. First of all, just because a student qualifies for FARM does not make them a special needs student. I was a FARM student and benefitted greatly from a rigorous academic program. It's somewhat insulting to suggest that high percentage of FARM students obviates the need for such programs. Second, even if this were true, the remaining 26% constitute way more than 10,000 students. This is a very large population to simply write off.

In any case, I'm not arguing against allowing charters that cater to students with special needs or particular interests or underserved wards, nor is anyone else. I'm suggesting that the role of the board should be to make more reasonable choices available to parents, not less and not impose their own preconceptions upon potential new charter organizations. Let the parents decide.

The board is a political entity. They know that once they cross the 50% threshold and become the majority educator in the district, they will face a lot more scrutiny, the sort that charters are not designed to survive...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The board is a political entity. They know that once they cross the 50% threshold and become the majority educator in the district, they will face a lot more scrutiny, the sort that charters are not designed to survive...

That's rather vague. Scrutiny of what? Whether they are meeting academic achievement benchmarks? Whether the families who attend the school are more satisfied than parents of DCPS? If they were scrutinized according to these criteria they would seem to have no trouble surviving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The board is consistent - they emphasize location and ability to serve special needs, ELL or at-risk students with every charter application. With 74% of DC students qualifying for FARMS, they need to.

They may be consistent, but they don't "need to" emphasize these issues and doing so is misguided. First of all, just because a student qualifies for FARM does not make them a special needs student. I was a FARM student and benefitted greatly from a rigorous academic program. It's somewhat insulting to suggest that high percentage of FARM students obviates the need for such programs. Second, even if this were true, the remaining 26% constitute way more than 10,000 students. This is a very large population to simply write off.

In any case, I'm not arguing against allowing charters that cater to students with special needs or particular interests or underserved wards, nor is anyone else. I'm suggesting that the role of the board should be to make more reasonable choices available to parents, not less and not impose their own preconceptions upon potential new charter organizations. Let the parents decide.

I'm the PP and certainly didn't mean to suggest that FARMS = SN. My older child has SN and an IEP and we are not economically at risk so I know that there isn't a single profile. My SN kid has always been above grade level but still has challenges in some areas.

The DC charter law is unique nationally in that each charter is its own LEA, as opposed to a school within a larger school district. That means that every DC charter school must serve all kids, regardless of disabilities on day 1. A new school can't simply assume all the kids will be typically developing and hire specialists or figure it out later if students who enroll need more support. These are public schools are a civil rights issue - it's not going to work to just say let the parents decide.

In 5 years BASIS DC has accrued a poor record on special education. They were found to deny FAPE to 2 students, settled 3 cases and 2 families withdrew before a decision. That doesn't include those that have left because the school wouldn't implement or adhere to the most basic accommodations to students with disabilities. Most students with disabilities are identified between K and 3rd grade -- it's especially incumbent on schools that serve those populations to find and help those students before they fall behind. It's quite fair to ask if they were willing and capable of doing that.

But of course, all of this is speculation. BASIS withdrew the application -- and no one knows why. The school has not shared this news with its current parents yet.

[Anonymous]

There were a lot more than 3 cases settled, at least through OCR-they had OCR complaints that never went to an investigation because the families agreed to go through Early Complaint Resolution instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There were a lot more than 3 cases settled, at least through OCR-they had OCR complaints that never went to an investigation because the families agreed to go through Early Complaint Resolution instead.

I believe it. The numbers above are the ones that are filed with OSSE's "Hearing Officer Database" - and were listed on page 34 of the charter renewal DCPCSB staff report.

http://www.livebinders.com/play/play?id=2116656#anchor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the PP and certainly didn't mean to suggest that FARMS = SN. My older child has SN and an IEP and we are not economically at risk so I know that there isn't a single profile. My SN kid has always been above grade level but still has challenges in some areas.

The DC charter law is unique nationally in that each charter is its own LEA, as opposed to a school within a larger school district. That means that every DC charter school must serve all kids, regardless of disabilities on day 1. A new school can't simply assume all the kids will be typically developing and hire specialists or figure it out later if students who enroll need more support. These are public schools are a civil rights issue - it's not going to work to just say let the parents decide.

In 5 years BASIS DC has accrued a poor record on special education. They were found to deny FAPE to 2 students, settled 3 cases and 2 families withdrew before a decision. That doesn't include those that have left because the school wouldn't implement or adhere to the most basic accommodations to students with disabilities. Most students with disabilities are identified between K and 3rd grade -- it's especially incumbent on schools that serve those populations to find and help those students before they fall behind. It's quite fair to ask if they were willing and capable of doing that.

But of course, all of this is speculation. BASIS withdrew the application -- and no one knows why. The school has not shared this news with its current parents yet.

Your argument effectively means that there can never be a charter school providing a very academically demanding curriculum because there will be some (not all) SN students who will never do well in this environment and the inability to serve "all kids regardless of disabilities on day 1" is a disqualifier. Perhaps you are stating this in absolute terms to make a point, but it precludes many other types of potentially very valuable charter schools.

That would be really unfortunate. I am just starting to assess the landscape of available options without a bias towards accommodation (we are expecting our first, and have no idea whether they will be SN or not) and I can easily see that there is a massive shortage of schools with the type of curriculum BASIS is able to provide and a huge surplus of emphasis on schools providing SN support. It seems to be the single most important criteria, followed by location in poor underserved communities. I think a lot of the hostility towards BASIS is unfair and unwarranted. No school can be all things to all students, but there are many parents and students who believe that BASIS does an amazing job for their needs. No student is required to go to BASIS, so it's existence forces nothing on anyway, it is just an additional choice.

[Anonymous]

I disagree.

For the charter sector, what it means is that a school has to make the effort to help all students succeed. There are no guarantees and stating that students have a right to "free apprpriate public education' is not hte same as saying that all students must graduate with 3.0 average, or pass at all.

But refusing to hire learning specialists, not dedicating a room for students to work with said specialists, and telling parents that they didn't 'believe' that students had a disability -- things BASIS did in its first two years -- is not allowed in a public school, charter or traditional.

The DCPCSB has not said BASIS needs to change their 'no social promotion' policy, their accelerated curriculum or the requirements of taking AP exams. Parents who have students with intellectual disabilities will figure out it's not going to be a great fit. But BASIS can't openly discriminate against students who need some additional supports - such as speech language therapy or a scribe for a student with dyslexia.

DCPS has much more ability to do what you say you are seeking but they don't do it at the middle school level. Magnet schools with test-in admissions or applications can exist within an LEA, so long as there are also schools that meet the needs of anyone who enrolls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I disagree.

For the charter sector, what it means is that a school has to make the effort to help all students succeed. There are no guarantees and stating that students have a right to "free apprpriate public education' is not hte same as saying that all students must graduate with 3.0 average, or pass at all.

But refusing to hire learning specialists, not dedicating a room for students to work with said specialists, and telling parents that they didn't 'believe' that students had a disability -- things BASIS did in its first two years -- is not allowed in a public school, charter or traditional.

DCPS has much more ability to do what you say you are seeking but they don't do it at the middle school level. Magnet schools with test-in admissions or applications can exist within an LEA, so long as there are also schools that meet the needs of anyone who enrolls.

Sorry but DCPS has demonstrated zero ability to provide anything similar to what BASIS provides and I have no expectation that they ever will. The issues you discuss with regards to specialists are issues BASIS acknowledged in the hearing and seemed to have been resolved some time ago. As best as I can tell, many charters struggle with this in their early years. My perception is the hostility towards BASIS extends far beyond these issues and is a reaction against many of the very same policies you say are perfectly allowable. Simply read some of the earlier comments in the thread and you will see this is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't it make more sense for them to open another middle school instead of an elementary school?

That was my first thought. What's their track record with high % FARM and special needs elementary students? What about gifted & talented elementary students of all backgrounds? Do they have tests that weed out students at young ages?

I'm just asking. Not criticizing. TIA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't it make more sense for them to open another middle school instead of an elementary school?

That was my first thought. What's their track record with high % FARM and special needs elementary students? What about gifted & talented elementary students of all backgrounds? Do they have tests that weed out students at young ages?

I'm just asking. Not criticizing. TIA

Basis has only been in the elementary school game for 2 years. Little data available. They wanted 2 elementary schools to feed the 1 middle.

No charters can be a test-in or gifted and talented school. Against the charter law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm the PP and certainly didn't mean to suggest that FARMS = SN. My older child has SN and an IEP and we are not economically at risk so I know that there isn't a single profile. My SN kid has always been above grade level but still has challenges in some areas.

The DC charter law is unique nationally in that each charter is its own LEA, as opposed to a school within a larger school district. That means that every DC charter school must serve all kids, regardless of disabilities on day 1. A new school can't simply assume all the kids will be typically developing and hire specialists or figure it out later if students who enroll need more support. These are public schools are a civil rights issue - it's not going to work to just say let the parents decide.

In 5 years BASIS DC has accrued a poor record on special education. They were found to deny FAPE to 2 students, settled 3 cases and 2 families withdrew before a decision. That doesn't include those that have left because the school wouldn't implement or adhere to the most basic accommodations to students with disabilities. Most students with disabilities are identified between K and 3rd grade -- it's especially incumbent on schools that serve those populations to find and help those students before they fall behind. It's quite fair to ask if they were willing and capable of doing that.

But of course, all of this is speculation. BASIS withdrew the application -- and no one knows why. The school has not shared this news with its current parents yet.

Your argument effectively means that there can never be a charter school providing a very academically demanding curriculum because there will be some (not all) SN students who will never do well in this environment and the inability to serve "all kids regardless of disabilities on day 1" is a disqualifier. Perhaps you are stating this in absolute terms to make a point, but it precludes many other types of potentially very valuable charter schools.

That would be really unfortunate. I am just starting to assess the landscape of available options without a bias towards accommodation (we are expecting our first, and have no idea whether they will be SN or not) and I can easily see that there is a massive shortage of schools with the type of curriculum BASIS is able to provide and a huge surplus of emphasis on schools providing SN support. It seems to be the single most important criteria, followed by location in poor underserved communities. I think a lot of the hostility towards BASIS is unfair and unwarranted. No school can be all things to all students, but there are many parents and students who believe that BASIS does an amazing job for their needs. No student is required to go to BASIS, so it's existence forces nothing on anyway, it is just an additional choice.

Not even a parent yet already an expert in schools.

Hint: google IDEA.