School Integration in Manhattan piece in the Atlantic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

How many DCPS schools are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

It looks like that in Ward 3 vs. Ward 7/8. I live in Ward 4, and many schools here are reasonably integrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

It looks like that in Ward 3 vs. Ward 7/8. I live in Ward 4, and many schools here are reasonably integrated.

Which Ward 4 elementary school - aside from Lafayette - is economically integrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

How many DCPS schools are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged?

I answered my own question. DCPS is 87 out of 115. Pretty much the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

It looks like that in Ward 3 vs. Ward 7/8. I live in Ward 4, and many schools here are reasonably integrated.

Which Ward 4 elementary school - aside from Lafayette - is economically integrated?

Shepherd, at 28% FARMS, would certainly fit the bill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

Inversely, it isn't necessarily "fair" that the lottery system provides an advantage to families that can transport their children to their location of choice - assuming that they 'win' the lottery.

If economic diversity is actually important to the charter system, then charters should have a specific mandate to provide enrollment preference to disadvantaged families within proximity to the schools. Of course, schools like YY, CMI, and the new MV are locating in areas where it is difficult for poor families to access. The result ends up the same as DCPS boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

Economically disadvantaged covers a lot of ground. The families that are poor but have the flexible schedules and support networks and other skills needed to research charters and enter the lottery and travel to school are not necessarily the same as the ones that show up to enroll their kids at my neighborhood DCPS after Labor Day (because that feels to them like when school should start) or who come mid-year because they got a safety transfer from public housing in one part of town to the housing near us after dealing with domestic violence or being threatened as witnesses to a crime, or who show up the month before PARCC after their charter makes life miserable for them. Both economically disadvantaged, but with different needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the point if the article, buried at the end, is that parents are only willing to sacrifice so much, and only if they feel the school district is trying to do the right thing and backing it up with real money. DCPS is not.

DCPS has an endless stream of money. They're just not willing to spend it on logical priorities like this. Instead, we wasted $150 million on Eastern (which is underenrolled), another $150 on Roosevelt (underenrolled) and now are prepared to completely flush $150 million on Coolidge (which is basically jail - nobody at Coolidge can even read or multiply).

Your children could have PLENTY of funding - but DCPS has made different priorities: pretty new buildings for old ladies who give money to the Mayor. No, the old ladies don't go to school, and their children either graduated or moved away. They just have fond memories of what's now a shitty high school and they don't care if funding a pile of bricks screws your children.

Welcome to DC politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Rethought to what? the alertnative is all those high SES families move to MD or VA as soon as their kid is 4. We already lived through that in DC. its not a bad thing to have a lot of high SES families raising money, donating, paying a lot in taxes in the city. And no I am not a CMI parent, I have been shut out two years running in the lottery for that school. But it is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

Inversely, it isn't necessarily "fair" that the lottery system provides an advantage to families that can transport their children to their location of choice - assuming that they 'win' the lottery.

If economic diversity is actually important to the charter system, then charters should have a specific mandate to provide enrollment preference to disadvantaged families within proximity to the schools. Of course, schools like YY, CMI, and the new MV are locating in areas where it is difficult for poor families to access. The result ends up the same as DCPS boundaries.

If you want lower SES children to attend high performing charters, then why aren't you advocating for charters to have access to closed DCPS facilities (which, by definition, are easily accessible - being as they are, schools). DCPS doesn't WANT competition from charters and therefore the charters are forced into facilities at market rates - which by definition are NOT convenient.

Then how are you surprised when only parents with means and options can get to them?

Open the 1.5 million sq. feet of closed schools to charters: then you'll see charters offering programming to children in easily accessible facilities. Until then, it's not their fault if they can afford to compete against the developers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

Inversely, it isn't necessarily "fair" that the lottery system provides an advantage to families that can transport their children to their location of choice - assuming that they 'win' the lottery.

If economic diversity is actually important to the charter system, then charters should have a specific mandate to provide enrollment preference to disadvantaged families within proximity to the schools. Of course, schools like YY, CMI, and the new MV are locating in areas where it is difficult for poor families to access. The result ends up the same as DCPS boundaries.

If you want lower SES children to attend high performing charters, then why aren't you advocating for charters to have access to closed DCPS facilities (which, by definition, are easily accessible - being as they are, schools). DCPS doesn't WANT competition from charters and therefore the charters are forced into facilities at market rates - which by definition are NOT convenient.

Then how are you surprised when only parents with means and options can get to them?

Open the 1.5 million sq. feet of closed schools to charters: then you'll see charters offering programming to children in easily accessible facilities. Until then, it's not their fault if they can afford to compete against the developers.

Should have read "CAN'T". As in "it's not their fault if they CAN'T afford to compete against the developers" (for metro-accessible and convenient buildings - the sort of locations which make great condos).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:one of the messages of pieces like this, even if it isn't a direct point, is that choice isn't really an effective outlet for poor families, who have residential and transportation mobility problems that richer parents can get past. and ultimately there is no choice-based solution for the segregated, majority-shunned location-tied schools (and their non-choosing populations) other than closure, perhaps with a new school entering the same building.

I leave it to smarter people than me to say whether taking the same non-choice population and giving them to a charter operator generates better results. My sense is no.

Except in DC the charter sector actually has a slightly larger percentage of economically disadvantaged students enrolled than does DCPS.

DCPS has a larger enrollment of ELLs and a very slim margin in number of students with disabilities.

So here many poor families are exercising choice.

http://www.dcpcsb.org/facts-and-figures-student-demographics

ok.... but - look at the Equity Reports and it is clear that 90 of the 115 charters are almost exclusively economically disadvantaged. for the 15-25 that aren't, those are the ones that the mid to high SES families are aiming for. so, just because the charter system has more low SES than DCPS, that doesn't mean that it is more integrated. it actually shows that the charter system is doing worse at economic integration than is DCPS.

if anything, it is amplifying the economic segregation because families with means are applying for the same 10-15 schools and, each year, the percent disadvantaged decreases. as soon as a school is in demand, the mid to high SES families will be applying en masse. the result is that a disproportionate amount of students in that school will be mid to high SES, and a low SES kid has less chance of benefitting from that school - even if they live in close proximity.

the charter system is basically supplying a discounted private option to mid-high SES families. I've heard of an in-demand charter raising close to $200k for a playground in one night - Creative Minds. Not that hard given 80% is mid-high SES.

the system needs to be rethought.

Seems like nothing could be more unfair and more segregated than DCPS and its neighborhood based boundaries.

Inversely, it isn't necessarily "fair" that the lottery system provides an advantage to families that can transport their children to their location of choice - assuming that they 'win' the lottery.

If economic diversity is actually important to the charter system, then charters should have a specific mandate to provide enrollment preference to disadvantaged families within proximity to the schools. Of course, schools like YY, CMI, and the new MV are locating in areas where it is difficult for poor families to access. The result ends up the same as DCPS boundaries.

If you want lower SES children to attend high performing charters, then why aren't you advocating for charters to have access to closed DCPS facilities (which, by definition, are easily accessible - being as they are, schools). DCPS doesn't WANT competition from charters and therefore the charters are forced into facilities at market rates - which by definition are NOT convenient.

Then how are you surprised when only parents with means and options can get to them?

Open the 1.5 million sq. feet of closed schools to charters: then you'll see charters offering programming to children in easily accessible facilities. Until then, it's not their fault if they can afford to compete against the developers.

Not 1.5 million sq feet, but DC is opening some. From a January press release https://dme.dc.gov/release/mayor-bowser-kicks-education-week-announces-change-dc-school-lottery-system

The Keene School will be awarded to DC Bilingual Public Charter School in Ward 4.

The P.R. Harris School will be awarded to the Charter School Incubator Initiative, which will develop the building for two public charter schools in Ward 8.

A community meeting will be held in February to discuss the solicitation of the Winston Education Campus in Ward 7 and Fletcher-Johnson Middle School in Ward 7, which will be made available to public charter schools.