BASIS: PCSB staff recommends conditional continuance due to SWD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why there isn't a 20-page thread on why school without walls has ZERO% special needs kids???

https://www.dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0466

why the double standard?

If you actually want the answer? It's because Banneker and Walls are part of a larger LEA. There's no obligation under disability law for a child to be accepted into a specialized program that they would not otherwise qualify for. But if they could succeed with supports, they have to be admitted. So for a level 3 or 4 IEP, there's no duty for Banneker or Walls to provide services, most likely. They can go elsewhere with in the LEA (any DCPS) and be served. But yeah, there should be some kids with IEPs/504s in Banneker and Walls. OSSE/DCPS should look into it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why there isn't a 20-page thread on why school without walls has ZERO% special needs kids???

https://www.dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0466

why the double standard?

If you actually want the answer? It's because Banneker and Walls are part of a larger LEA. There's no obligation under disability law for a child to be accepted into a specialized program that they would not otherwise qualify for. But if they could succeed with supports, they have to be admitted. So for a level 3 or 4 IEP, there's no duty for Banneker or Walls to provide services, most likely. They can go elsewhere with in the LEA (any DCPS) and be served. But yeah, there should be some kids with IEPs/504s in Banneker and Walls. OSSE/DCPS should look into it.

I get the legal distinction, but not the overall philopshical one. The reality is that DC schools are all on the table for all students. Why, in concept, is it ok for one group of schools to discriminate with SN kids and one not?

I do want the answer, because what consititutes an LEA is a legal but not practical distinction as far as I can see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

No, charters are federally required to serve kids with disabilities, and kids with disabilities are entitled to the least restrictive environment. Other charters figured it out and Basis has to as well. Period. BTW SN charters exist already.

BASIS simply can't fulfill its mission as the DC public HS offering the most math and science rigor while serving kids with a wide range of disabilities well without a dramatic increase in funding per capita. They just can't afford to hire the resource staff they'd need to do this. If they're forced to water down their curriculum to accommodate students with disabilities at the expense of their math whizzes, what they're going to do is exit the DC stage in search of greener pastures. No doubt that Texas would be thrilled to gain another BASIS campus, with no quibbles about how well SN and ELL students are accommodated by the franchise in the Lone Star State. In that case, you might be better off pointing the finger at the DC Council and Mayor for failing to pony up for funding than the BASIS franchise.

If they can’t comply with the law, I guess they have to shut down.

Yes. It's far better to shut down something that serves many kids well so that then all kids can go on to schools where they are ALL served poorly. Oh well!

That does seem to be what some people want. Crabs in a barrel - tear down the ones climbing up the sides to escape - bring it all down to the lowest common denominator! God forbid DC has a public option that is academically advanced and super challenging ("that's no fair!").

I guess I don't really understand what the SN advocates on this thread envision. Is it their position all SN kids can handle algebra, physics, biology, and chemistry (because I think it is widely acknowledged that there a lot of non-SN kids that can't handle it/the school isn't a good fit for)? That SN kids should be socially promoted even though non-SN kids will not be socially promoted? How exactly does the SN support work at a school with a very demanding and difficult curriculum with year-end (exacting and stressful) comprehensive exams that must be passed for a kid to be promoted to the next grade?

I think they envision that it could be a good fit if BASIS were willing to provide the support that is needed and BASIS should stop acting like its model is an immutable fact and cannot be modified for any reason. It's a choice.

I think that SN parents on this thread and the charter board are saying it already is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why there isn't a 20-page thread on why school without walls has ZERO% special needs kids???

https://www.dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0466

why the double standard?

Because it's not legal for charters.

So you only care about what's legal? Not what's right?

You think it's really ok for the two test in high schools in DC not to allow any SN kids to attend?

I don't love it and I don't think it's right. But that's the law at this time. So if someone is asking why there is a double standard, it's because the law allows for it.

You will fight tooth and nail about Basis but not SWW? Seriously? I am genuinely shocked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

No, charters are federally required to serve kids with disabilities, and kids with disabilities are entitled to the least restrictive environment. Other charters figured it out and Basis has to as well. Period. BTW SN charters exist already.

BASIS simply can't fulfill its mission as the DC public HS offering the most math and science rigor while serving kids with a wide range of disabilities well without a dramatic increase in funding per capita. They just can't afford to hire the resource staff they'd need to do this. If they're forced to water down their curriculum to accommodate students with disabilities at the expense of their math whizzes, what they're going to do is exit the DC stage in search of greener pastures. No doubt that Texas would be thrilled to gain another BASIS campus, with no quibbles about how well SN and ELL students are accommodated by the franchise in the Lone Star State. In that case, you might be better off pointing the finger at the DC Council and Mayor for failing to pony up for funding than the BASIS franchise.

If they can’t comply with the law, I guess they have to shut down.

Yes. It's far better to shut down something that serves many kids well so that then all kids can go on to schools where they are ALL served poorly. Oh well!

That does seem to be what some people want. Crabs in a barrel - tear down the ones climbing up the sides to escape - bring it all down to the lowest common denominator! God forbid DC has a public option that is academically advanced and super challenging ("that's no fair!").

I guess I don't really understand what the SN advocates on this thread envision. Is it their position all SN kids can handle algebra, physics, biology, and chemistry (because I think it is widely acknowledged that there a lot of non-SN kids that can't handle it/the school isn't a good fit for)? That SN kids should be socially promoted even though non-SN kids will not be socially promoted? How exactly does the SN support work at a school with a very demanding and difficult curriculum with year-end (exacting and stressful) comprehensive exams that must be passed for a kid to be promoted to the next grade?

I think they envision that it could be a good fit if BASIS were willing to provide the support that is needed and BASIS should stop acting like its model is an immutable fact and cannot be modified for any reason. It's a choice.

I think that SN parents on this thread and the charter board are saying it already is.

Well, I guess it's just a big coincidence that they have so few kids with SN, and also completely unrelated that their IDEA compliance is way worse than most charters? And while they may be serving a narrow subset of students with SN, their overall reputation for SN is godawful and they have almost nobody with a higher level IEP. Everything's cool and these things aren't related?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

THIS. In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models. They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do. They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs. They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board. DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas. Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.

when your ultimate argument is that it is unfair for parents to seek legally entitled education for their disabled kids, you lose all credibility as an analyst of the situation. what you REALLY think is that SN kids don’t deserve any resources or anything that takes away from your kid.

Again, if its so easy, simple, then why argue? I mean, its the law, isn't it. Should be a slam dunk to get whatever you think your kid is legally entitled to.

If I was in charge of Basis, sure. But all the Basis boosters here are saying they don’t think Basis should have to do it.

But why do you care? if you are 100% protected by simple legal rights, why do you argue with people?

I'm being pedantic, but trying to make the point that claiming "but the law" isn't enough, which is why you and other people are arguing. "The law" is always subject to interpretation, which is why, as so many SN parents here attest, it's damn hard to get the services their kids need. I suspect you are arguing with posters on this thread because at the end of the day it's not easy or simple. And not black and white. If you want advocates for SN services and support, perhaps a different approach is warranted.

What kind of "different approach" do you think is warranted, when there are Basis advocates on here saying "Basis should be exempt from the law becuase it is special"? Is your question about what else should be brought to bear to ensure that Basis complies with the law, for individual kids, and for DC kids overall? There's no black and white here - the claims that some Basis boosters are making that Basis should just ... not follow the law. If what you're saying is that nothing can guarantee a specific outcome for an individual child, sure. But that's different from getting the services they are legally entitled to.

I don't see one post where anyone claims Basis shouldn't "follow the law" nor do I see any evidence that Basis is not, in fact doing so. Again, enrollment, not actual violations are at issue.

But your sentence bolded above hits right on the issue- exactly. Basis is challenging and demands A LOT. And most- more than half- of kids leave by high school. This is for all sorts of reasons, but workload is a part of it. I think there is a concern that advocates are saying "you must change the structure so that kids with SN can't fail," or "You can't have standards so high that SN kids can't meet them." Perhaps its because we are ignorant about what supports really consititue for kids or perhaps its because we know that lots of NT kids struggle at Basis too. I don't know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

No, charters are federally required to serve kids with disabilities, and kids with disabilities are entitled to the least restrictive environment. Other charters figured it out and Basis has to as well. Period. BTW SN charters exist already.

BASIS simply can't fulfill its mission as the DC public HS offering the most math and science rigor while serving kids with a wide range of disabilities well without a dramatic increase in funding per capita. They just can't afford to hire the resource staff they'd need to do this. If they're forced to water down their curriculum to accommodate students with disabilities at the expense of their math whizzes, what they're going to do is exit the DC stage in search of greener pastures. No doubt that Texas would be thrilled to gain another BASIS campus, with no quibbles about how well SN and ELL students are accommodated by the franchise in the Lone Star State. In that case, you might be better off pointing the finger at the DC Council and Mayor for failing to pony up for funding than the BASIS franchise.

If they can’t comply with the law, I guess they have to shut down.

Yes. It's far better to shut down something that serves many kids well so that then all kids can go on to schools where they are ALL served poorly. Oh well!

That does seem to be what some people want. Crabs in a barrel - tear down the ones climbing up the sides to escape - bring it all down to the lowest common denominator! God forbid DC has a public option that is academically advanced and super challenging ("that's no fair!").

I guess I don't really understand what the SN advocates on this thread envision. Is it their position all SN kids can handle algebra, physics, biology, and chemistry (because I think it is widely acknowledged that there a lot of non-SN kids that can't handle it/the school isn't a good fit for)? That SN kids should be socially promoted even though non-SN kids will not be socially promoted? How exactly does the SN support work at a school with a very demanding and difficult curriculum with year-end (exacting and stressful) comprehensive exams that must be passed for a kid to be promoted to the next grade?

I think they envision that it could be a good fit if BASIS were willing to provide the support that is needed and BASIS should stop acting like its model is an immutable fact and cannot be modified for any reason. It's a choice.

I think that SN parents on this thread and the charter board are saying it already is.

Well, I guess it's just a big coincidence that they have so few kids with SN, and also completely unrelated that their IDEA compliance is way worse than most charters? And while they may be serving a narrow subset of students with SN, their overall reputation for SN is godawful and they have almost nobody with a higher level IEP. Everything's cool and these things aren't related?

I guess so. That's what the report said.
Alternatively, because their what, "reputation" on DCUM is a problem then it must be true? Lord help all Mothers in Law or that poor woman with the aperagus spears.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why there isn't a 20-page thread on why school without walls has ZERO% special needs kids???

https://www.dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0466

why the double standard?

If you actually want the answer? It's because Banneker and Walls are part of a larger LEA. There's no obligation under disability law for a child to be accepted into a specialized program that they would not otherwise qualify for. But if they could succeed with supports, they have to be admitted. So for a level 3 or 4 IEP, there's no duty for Banneker or Walls to provide services, most likely. They can go elsewhere with in the LEA (any DCPS) and be served. But yeah, there should be some kids with IEPs/504s in Banneker and Walls. OSSE/DCPS should look into it.

I get the legal distinction, but not the overall philopshical one. The reality is that DC schools are all on the table for all students. Why, in concept, is it ok for one group of schools to discriminate with SN kids and one not?

I do want the answer, because what consititutes an LEA is a legal but not practical distinction as far as I can see.

this is about my kid’s legal rights; not super interested in having a philosophical debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why there isn't a 20-page thread on why school without walls has ZERO% special needs kids???

https://www.dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0466

why the double standard?

Because it's not legal for charters.

So you only care about what's legal? Not what's right?

You think it's really ok for the two test in high schools in DC not to allow any SN kids to attend?

I don't love it and I don't think it's right. But that's the law at this time. So if someone is asking why there is a double standard, it's because the law allows for it.

You will fight tooth and nail about Basis but not SWW? Seriously? I am genuinely shocked.

there’s a legal difference between Basis and SWW. you can care to learn about it or not; I don’t really care that you are “shocked.” that said Walls should stop discriminating against IEPs too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why there isn't a 20-page thread on why school without walls has ZERO% special needs kids???

https://www.dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0466

why the double standard?

If you actually want the answer? It's because Banneker and Walls are part of a larger LEA. There's no obligation under disability law for a child to be accepted into a specialized program that they would not otherwise qualify for. But if they could succeed with supports, they have to be admitted. So for a level 3 or 4 IEP, there's no duty for Banneker or Walls to provide services, most likely. They can go elsewhere with in the LEA (any DCPS) and be served. But yeah, there should be some kids with IEPs/504s in Banneker and Walls. OSSE/DCPS should look into it.

I get the legal distinction, but not the overall philopshical one. The reality is that DC schools are all on the table for all students. Why, in concept, is it ok for one group of schools to discriminate with SN kids and one not?

I do want the answer, because what consititutes an LEA is a legal but not practical distinction as far as I can see.

this is about my kid’s legal rights; not super interested in having a philosophical debate.

Again, it "your legal rights" is so easy, black and white, why post at all? You clearly have everything you need. You must already be satisfied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

No, charters are federally required to serve kids with disabilities, and kids with disabilities are entitled to the least restrictive environment. Other charters figured it out and Basis has to as well. Period. BTW SN charters exist already.

BASIS simply can't fulfill its mission as the DC public HS offering the most math and science rigor while serving kids with a wide range of disabilities well without a dramatic increase in funding per capita. They just can't afford to hire the resource staff they'd need to do this. If they're forced to water down their curriculum to accommodate students with disabilities at the expense of their math whizzes, what they're going to do is exit the DC stage in search of greener pastures. No doubt that Texas would be thrilled to gain another BASIS campus, with no quibbles about how well SN and ELL students are accommodated by the franchise in the Lone Star State. In that case, you might be better off pointing the finger at the DC Council and Mayor for failing to pony up for funding than the BASIS franchise.

If they can’t comply with the law, I guess they have to shut down.

Yes. It's far better to shut down something that serves many kids well so that then all kids can go on to schools where they are ALL served poorly. Oh well!

That does seem to be what some people want. Crabs in a barrel - tear down the ones climbing up the sides to escape - bring it all down to the lowest common denominator! God forbid DC has a public option that is academically advanced and super challenging ("that's no fair!").

I guess I don't really understand what the SN advocates on this thread envision. Is it their position all SN kids can handle algebra, physics, biology, and chemistry (because I think it is widely acknowledged that there a lot of non-SN kids that can't handle it/the school isn't a good fit for)? That SN kids should be socially promoted even though non-SN kids will not be socially promoted? How exactly does the SN support work at a school with a very demanding and difficult curriculum with year-end (exacting and stressful) comprehensive exams that must be passed for a kid to be promoted to the next grade?

I think they envision that it could be a good fit if BASIS were willing to provide the support that is needed and BASIS should stop acting like its model is an immutable fact and cannot be modified for any reason. It's a choice.

I think that SN parents on this thread and the charter board are saying it already is.

No, the school cannot point to the (small) number of kids with IEPs and claim success. I doubt the PP comparing our kids to crabs is really interested in learning about the kinds of supports that could help kids be successful; as well as Basis’s obligation to support kids who need more support than that. PP ironically proves they view this all as a zero-sum game where every crab is in it for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why there isn't a 20-page thread on why school without walls has ZERO% special needs kids???

https://www.dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0466

why the double standard?

Because it's not legal for charters.

So you only care about what's legal? Not what's right?

You think it's really ok for the two test in high schools in DC not to allow any SN kids to attend?

I don't love it and I don't think it's right. But that's the law at this time. So if someone is asking why there is a double standard, it's because the law allows for it.

You will fight tooth and nail about Basis but not SWW? Seriously? I am genuinely shocked.

there’s a legal difference between Basis and SWW. you can care to learn about it or not; I don’t really care that you are “shocked.” that said Walls should stop discriminating against IEPs too.

Let me know when the SN advocates start to actually care about SWW/Banneker etc. Until then, you are all hypocrites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me why there isn't a 20-page thread on why school without walls has ZERO% special needs kids???

https://www.dcschoolreportcard.org/schools/1-0466

why the double standard?

If you actually want the answer? It's because Banneker and Walls are part of a larger LEA. There's no obligation under disability law for a child to be accepted into a specialized program that they would not otherwise qualify for. But if they could succeed with supports, they have to be admitted. So for a level 3 or 4 IEP, there's no duty for Banneker or Walls to provide services, most likely. They can go elsewhere with in the LEA (any DCPS) and be served. But yeah, there should be some kids with IEPs/504s in Banneker and Walls. OSSE/DCPS should look into it.

I get the legal distinction, but not the overall philopshical one. The reality is that DC schools are all on the table for all students. Why, in concept, is it ok for one group of schools to discriminate with SN kids and one not?

I do want the answer, because what consititutes an LEA is a legal but not practical distinction as far as I can see.

this is about my kid’s legal rights; not super interested in having a philosophical debate.

Again, it "your legal rights" is so easy, black and white, why post at all? You clearly have everything you need. You must already be satisfied.

are you … confused? legal rights can be violated. Basis needs to be made to comply with the law. I don’t have what I need until they actually comply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

No, charters are federally required to serve kids with disabilities, and kids with disabilities are entitled to the least restrictive environment. Other charters figured it out and Basis has to as well. Period. BTW SN charters exist already.

BASIS simply can't fulfill its mission as the DC public HS offering the most math and science rigor while serving kids with a wide range of disabilities well without a dramatic increase in funding per capita. They just can't afford to hire the resource staff they'd need to do this. If they're forced to water down their curriculum to accommodate students with disabilities at the expense of their math whizzes, what they're going to do is exit the DC stage in search of greener pastures. No doubt that Texas would be thrilled to gain another BASIS campus, with no quibbles about how well SN and ELL students are accommodated by the franchise in the Lone Star State. In that case, you might be better off pointing the finger at the DC Council and Mayor for failing to pony up for funding than the BASIS franchise.

If they can’t comply with the law, I guess they have to shut down.

Yes. It's far better to shut down something that serves many kids well so that then all kids can go on to schools where they are ALL served poorly. Oh well!

That does seem to be what some people want. Crabs in a barrel - tear down the ones climbing up the sides to escape - bring it all down to the lowest common denominator! God forbid DC has a public option that is academically advanced and super challenging ("that's no fair!").

I guess I don't really understand what the SN advocates on this thread envision. Is it their position all SN kids can handle algebra, physics, biology, and chemistry (because I think it is widely acknowledged that there a lot of non-SN kids that can't handle it/the school isn't a good fit for)? That SN kids should be socially promoted even though non-SN kids will not be socially promoted? How exactly does the SN support work at a school with a very demanding and difficult curriculum with year-end (exacting and stressful) comprehensive exams that must be passed for a kid to be promoted to the next grade?

I think they envision that it could be a good fit if BASIS were willing to provide the support that is needed and BASIS should stop acting like its model is an immutable fact and cannot be modified for any reason. It's a choice.

I think that SN parents on this thread and the charter board are saying it already is.

No, the school cannot point to the (small) number of kids with IEPs and claim success. I doubt the PP comparing our kids to crabs is really interested in learning about the kinds of supports that could help kids be successful; as well as Basis’s obligation to support kids who need more support than that. PP ironically proves they view this all as a zero-sum game where every crab is in it for themselves.

The charter board said it is.

What crabs are we talking about here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The crux of the problem is that the ed powers in this city want to have it both ways: they want to continue to underfund charters relative to DCPS programs on a per capita basis while requiring the latter to provide DCPS-level support for SN students and English Language Learners. They don't want students with disabilities and poor kids to be excluded from the best public schools, but refuse to provide the GT education that would help the brightest poor kids students enjoy strong representation in the public HS programs offering the most rigor. They want high-performing test-in magnets that compare to the top performers in other US cities, but won't support the requisite K-8 prep and ability grouping to create them. Something has to give, with the charter board, OSSE and the Mayor's office turning a blind eye because they boxed themselves into a corner long ago. At BASIS, conveniently, it's support for SN and ELL. As long as a couple students a year from BASIS continue to crack MIT and Yale, no politician is going to mess with BASIS DC. It's no secret that the franchise has found far more fertile ground to expand its public school empire in Texas and Louisiana than in DC. The Charter Board is toothless without political backing.

Excellent summation. To that I would add that the failure of DCPS to address the bolded sentence is WHY ---20 years into charter schools---charters went from the original intent of being "niche" educational programs: dual language, montessori/experiential learning, etc.---into serving 45% of the kids currently using public education in the District. So now that charters are essentially a parallel school system, the first sentence---creating unreasonable expectations for charters as a result of underfunding---has become the reality.
What I would like to see is a charter that is expressly special-ed---like a charter version of LAB. And with an admissions system that either lets you lottery for it with an existing IEP, OR allows a charter to charter transfer for kids who are identified as needing greater services than the charter can provide. That would seem to be much more practical than the current world---which expects all schools to be all things for SPED kids. I have a SPED kid. We would never have lotteried DC into a program like BASIS and then demanded that BASIS accommodate DC. That would have unreasonable for both the schools and DC.

THIS. In the last 20 years, DCPS could have competed with charter "niche" educational programs by innovating, using the best school systems in other big cities as models. They could have ramped up their test-in HS magnet programs to offer BASIS level academics fed by test-in MS programs, like NYC, Chicago and Boston do. They could have introduced bona fide academic tracking across core subjects in most of their MS programs. They could even have created superior language immersion programs, with lotteries for native speakers across the board. DCPS didn't bother, hence almost half the public school students in the city are enrolled in charters, including the great majority of UMC families outside the Deal-Wilson catchment areas. Good for you, PP, for not demanding that a cash-strapped charter provides your student with state of the art SN programming.

when your ultimate argument is that it is unfair for parents to seek legally entitled education for their disabled kids, you lose all credibility as an analyst of the situation. what you REALLY think is that SN kids don’t deserve any resources or anything that takes away from your kid.

Again, if its so easy, simple, then why argue? I mean, its the law, isn't it. Should be a slam dunk to get whatever you think your kid is legally entitled to.

If I was in charge of Basis, sure. But all the Basis boosters here are saying they don’t think Basis should have to do it.

But why do you care? if you are 100% protected by simple legal rights, why do you argue with people?

I'm being pedantic, but trying to make the point that claiming "but the law" isn't enough, which is why you and other people are arguing. "The law" is always subject to interpretation, which is why, as so many SN parents here attest, it's damn hard to get the services their kids need. I suspect you are arguing with posters on this thread because at the end of the day it's not easy or simple. And not black and white. If you want advocates for SN services and support, perhaps a different approach is warranted.

What kind of "different approach" do you think is warranted, when there are Basis advocates on here saying "Basis should be exempt from the law becuase it is special"? Is your question about what else should be brought to bear to ensure that Basis complies with the law, for individual kids, and for DC kids overall? There's no black and white here - the claims that some Basis boosters are making that Basis should just ... not follow the law. If what you're saying is that nothing can guarantee a specific outcome for an individual child, sure. But that's different from getting the services they are legally entitled to.

I don't see one post where anyone claims Basis shouldn't "follow the law" nor do I see any evidence that Basis is not, in fact doing so. Again, enrollment, not actual violations are at issue.

But your sentence bolded above hits right on the issue- exactly. Basis is challenging and demands A LOT. And most- more than half- of kids leave by high school. This is for all sorts of reasons, but workload is a part of it. I think there is a concern that advocates are saying "you must change the structure so that kids with SN can't fail," or "You can't have standards so high that SN kids can't meet them." Perhaps its because we are ignorant about what supports really consititue for kids or perhaps its because we know that lots of NT kids struggle at Basis too. I don't know.

ok you don’t know so MYOB. IDEA compliance is required for all. I don’t have to show you my kid’s IEP. Maybe do some self-reflection about your personal values if you’re so panicked that Basis might have to add 2-3 more special ed staff and some kids may get additional time on tests. SN are not contagious.