Thousands of kids attend charters without in person option

[Anonymous]

I agree that the reporting must go much further. This is an epic breakdown of leadership and societal function.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thousands of kids also attend DCPS schools with no in person option. So tired of seeing these articles suggesting that DCPS is open. My kids attend Deal and Wilson and have accepted every option given them to be in a school building and they are not getting in person instruction. Between the two of them they have 28 instructional periods a week and exactly ONE is taught by a teacher in the room. But somehow everyone is celebrating how DCPS is now open for business.

this. it's not like charters are the only ones doing a terrible job. dcps is doing an abysmal job as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DCPS is nearly as bad as these charters


"Currently about 15,000 of the school system’s 52,000 students are learning in school buildings at least one day a week."

Yes! These numbers are alarming. I do believe that parents are ill informed about the pandemic at this point and continuing to be satisfied with what they are told is perfectly fine virtual education.

[Anonymous]

My question is how far will enrollment drop next year across the board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My question is how far will enrollment drop next year across the board?

It's going to be huge. A LOT of people have left DC in the past year according to permanent change of address forms filed with the post office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My question is how far will enrollment drop next year across the board?

It's going to be huge. A LOT of people have left DC in the past year according to permanent change of address forms filed with the post office.

And yet, not enough to make anyone care.

Kids, schools are the least important news story of the pandemic in DC. Who even read this article besides those of us with kids in public school?

We are at a charter which is partially open, and I certainly can't call its virtual offering high quality. I don't think DCPS has done a lot better. It's because nobody cares (Mayor certainly does not).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My question is how far will enrollment drop next year across the board?

It's going to be huge. A LOT of people have left DC in the past year according to permanent change of address forms filed with the post office.

And that's just the ones moving. The number bailing for private schools is going to be significant too. And the ones who are just heading to VA/MD probably haven't moved yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the charters in DC don’t serve students any better than traditional public schools. They are a drain on our tax dollars and I wish the city would put a moratorium on new ones opening.

This.

Charters refuse to serve students with all but the mildest disabilities. How is it fair for them to do that with public funds?

Agree completely. We were at a charter and now I am ashamed we were ever foolish enough to make that choice.

It’s not your fault.

In this area, they are marketed to make certain groups feel safe with DC residency and all over the country, they are a right wing darling. People don’t realize they are being tricked because they are already emotionally invested in the idea that their children are different from others and deserve better than what the traditional schools can offer. Apparently, investing time, money, and effort in improving the traditional school for all children is for a goal for chumps. Turns out charter parents are chumps, too.

[Anonymous]

Article by well known, experienced reporter: charters did not fully open, partially due to low demand from some members of the community.

DCUM posters: that’s not possible because it’s not what I want! Someone must have gotten to Perry Stein

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the charters in DC don’t serve students any better than traditional public schools. They are a drain on our tax dollars and I wish the city would put a moratorium on new ones opening.

This.

Charters refuse to serve students with all but the mildest disabilities. How is it fair for them to do that with public funds?

Agree completely. We were at a charter and now I am ashamed we were ever foolish enough to make that choice.

It’s not your fault.

In this area, they are marketed to make certain groups feel safe with DC residency and all over the country, they are a right wing darling. People don’t realize they are being tricked because they are already emotionally invested in the idea that their children are different from others and deserve better than what the traditional schools can offer. Apparently, investing time, money, and effort in improving the traditional school for all children is for a goal for chumps. Turns out charter parents are chumps, too.

The problem is not that charter schools exist. The problem is the people leading some of those charter schools. If it wasn't for charters, we'd all be prisoners of the thoroughly rotten public school system, which the pandemic has shown is controlled by WTU.

What we need are a lot more vouchers so that we can escape bad charter/DCPS schools and go private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Article by well known, experienced reporter: charters did not fully open, partially due to low demand from some members of the community.

DCUM posters: that’s not possible because it’s not what I want! Someone must have gotten to Perry Stein

It's the "due to low demand" question that deserves MUCH better reporting than we got. How did she assess demand? How many school parents did she talk to? Did she talk to any homeless parents at Roots? Did she look at the research that indicates that demand is driven by the school's actions, and parents take their cues from the school? And how about the "due to" part. Was it "due to" parent demand, or was it "due to" self-interested decisions by adminstration and teachers? And how about challenging that absoutely absurd quote by the Roots adminstrator at the end suggesting that online learning is just as good as in person?

I mean, it's like you want us to all collectively ignore the the fact that a) there is tons of evidence that DL is terrible for kids, especially at risk kids and b) schools can reopen safely and c) private/parochials/and other urban publics are open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Article by well known, experienced reporter: charters did not fully open, partially due to low demand from some members of the community.

DCUM posters: that’s not possible because it’s not what I want! Someone must have gotten to Perry Stein

It's the "due to low demand" question that deserves MUCH better reporting than we got. How did she assess demand? How many school parents did she talk to? Did she talk to any homeless parents at Roots? Did she look at the research that indicates that demand is driven by the school's actions, and parents take their cues from the school? And how about the "due to" part. Was it "due to" parent demand, or was it "due to" self-interested decisions by adminstration and teachers? And how about challenging that absoutely absurd quote by the Roots adminstrator at the end suggesting that online learning is just as good as in person?

I mean, it's like you want us to all collectively ignore the the fact that a) there is tons of evidence that DL is terrible for kids, especially at risk kids and b) schools can reopen safely and c) private/parochials/and other urban publics are open.

Well, there are plenty of stories in the paper already about schools with open doors and no students willing to attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the charters in DC don’t serve students any better than traditional public schools. They are a drain on our tax dollars and I wish the city would put a moratorium on new ones opening.

This.

Charters refuse to serve students with all but the mildest disabilities. How is it fair for them to do that with public funds?

Agree completely. We were at a charter and now I am ashamed we were ever foolish enough to make that choice.

It’s not your fault.

In this area, they are marketed to make certain groups feel safe with DC residency and all over the country, they are a right wing darling. People don’t realize they are being tricked because they are already emotionally invested in the idea that their children are different from others and deserve better than what the traditional schools can offer. Apparently, investing time, money, and effort in improving the traditional school for all children is for a goal for chumps. Turns out charter parents are chumps, too.

The problem is not that charter schools exist. The problem is the people leading some of those charter schools. If it wasn't for charters, we'd all be prisoners of the thoroughly rotten public school system, which the pandemic has shown is controlled by WTU.

What we need are a lot more vouchers so that we can escape bad charter/DCPS schools and go private.

TBH I'm not sure what kind of conclusions to come to about charter schools. On the one hand, I now am very skeptical about anything that teachers' unions and their supporters say, which includes a lot of anti-charter stuff. On the other hand, it's clear that charters have done worse than DCPS in reopening. I think the conclusion I'm leaning towards is that charters need stricter and more centralized oversight. I had really thought that the mission-driven aspect of charters like KIPP would mean that they would be on the cutting edge of getting kids back, but I was wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Article by well known, experienced reporter: charters did not fully open, partially due to low demand from some members of the community.

DCUM posters: that’s not possible because it’s not what I want! Someone must have gotten to Perry Stein

It's the "due to low demand" question that deserves MUCH better reporting than we got. How did she assess demand? How many school parents did she talk to? Did she talk to any homeless parents at Roots? Did she look at the research that indicates that demand is driven by the school's actions, and parents take their cues from the school? And how about the "due to" part. Was it "due to" parent demand, or was it "due to" self-interested decisions by adminstration and teachers? And how about challenging that absoutely absurd quote by the Roots adminstrator at the end suggesting that online learning is just as good as in person?

I mean, it's like you want us to all collectively ignore the the fact that a) there is tons of evidence that DL is terrible for kids, especially at risk kids and b) schools can reopen safely and c) private/parochials/and other urban publics are open.

Well, there are plenty of stories in the paper already about schools with open doors and no students willing to attend.

Where? And like I said, what does "willing to attend" mean? Does it mean they are scared because the teachers and admins are telling them to be scared? Does it mean that hybrid or extremely limited or "zoom in a room" options are being rejected because they aren't an improvement over DL? Does it mean that famlies that were already marginally connected to schools are not just completely disconnected?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Article by well known, experienced reporter: charters did not fully open, partially due to low demand from some members of the community.

DCUM posters: that’s not possible because it’s not what I want! Someone must have gotten to Perry Stein

It's the "due to low demand" question that deserves MUCH better reporting than we got. How did she assess demand? How many school parents did she talk to? Did she talk to any homeless parents at Roots? Did she look at the research that indicates that demand is driven by the school's actions, and parents take their cues from the school? And how about the "due to" part. Was it "due to" parent demand, or was it "due to" self-interested decisions by adminstration and teachers? And how about challenging that absoutely absurd quote by the Roots adminstrator at the end suggesting that online learning is just as good as in person?

I mean, it's like you want us to all collectively ignore the the fact that a) there is tons of evidence that DL is terrible for kids, especially at risk kids and b) schools can reopen safely and c) private/parochials/and other urban publics are open.

This is the most important question. Our school continues to say that demand was low, but all the parents I know at the school wanted kids back in person. The survey our charter sent did not even have an option for 4 days a week, full full day (9-3:30), which is the only way it could be workable for most dual-working or single parent homes. They designed the survey to get the result they wanted - no IPL - by only offering options that were completely impossible logistically for almost anyone, like two mornings a week.